From: Frank Rowand <frank_rowand@hp.com>
To: Grant Grundler <grundler@cup.hp.com>
Cc: parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com,
Helge Deller <Helge.Deller@ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] LASI and serial port initialization
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 09:46:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <380CA049.E16634DF@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 199910191630.JAA27454@milano.cup.hp.com
Grant Grundler wrote:
>
> Helge and I exchanged some e-mail on the topic of LASI vis a vie
> serial port initialization. Since then, I've come to the conclusion
> all (or most) parisc platforms will have a similar problem.
>
> The problem is LASI is "discovered" and initialized well after several
> other drivers want to print things to the console. I see a few options
> on how to handle it:
> 1) For each platform, force the console to be the first device "discovered"
> and initialized. This is not a really good idea since console can be
> different depending on configuration. Rebuilding the kernel to use
> a different console doesn't seem reasonable to me. Having the user
> figure out which devices need to be initialized first and build an
> appropriate kernel so console works also seems unreasonable. We are
> headed down this path now though....
>
> 2) Use IODC until the console device is "owned" by the appropriate driver
> and can start taking input/output.
>
> 3) buffer the output instead of calling IODC.
> Size of the buffer will impose some sort of limit.
> I think this is what HP-UX does but don't really know
> and it shouldn't matter to us.
Yes, this is what HP-UX does. And in the case of a panic, the buffered
messages are flushed to the console via IODC.
> Either 2 or 3 requires some software layer behind printk to change
> behavior at some point. I don't know where that point is or how
> exactly to define it. I just thought going down path #1 is going
> to be a real pain to support on a broad set of platforms.
>
> Any other thoughts?
Yes, 2 or 3 sound best.
Some pros & cons... (assume that the pros are the opposite of the cons
for the other option)
2) con: - polled I/O
- may need to add infrastructure to do IODC I/O (but this should
be in place for the panic and dump path anyway)
pro: - should work on all platforms, once it works on one
3) con: - when debugging new drivers and platforms, you won't get any
debugging messages until the console driver works
-Frank
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-10-19 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <99101821580101.00297@P100>
1999-10-19 16:30 ` [parisc-linux] LASI and serial port initialization Grant Grundler
1999-10-19 16:46 ` Frank Rowand [this message]
1999-10-19 16:58 ` Alan Cox
1999-10-19 17:22 ` Philipp Rumpf
1999-10-19 17:32 Mike Hibler
1999-10-19 18:36 ` Grant Grundler
1999-10-19 20:13 ` Phil Schwan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=380CA049.E16634DF@hp.com \
--to=frank_rowand@hp.com \
--cc=Helge.Deller@ruhr-uni-bochum.de \
--cc=frowand@cup.hp.com \
--cc=grundler@cup.hp.com \
--cc=parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox