d/freebsd-dev
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
a91a792fed
freebsd-dev/sys/dev/uart/uart_tty.c

570 lines
14 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
/*
* Copyright (c) 2003 Marcel Moolenaar
* All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
* modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
* are met:
*
* 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
* documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
*
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR
* IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES
* OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
* IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT,
* INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT
* NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
* DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
* THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
* (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF
* THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
*/
#include <sys/cdefs.h>
__FBSDID("$FreeBSD$");
#include <sys/param.h>
#include <sys/systm.h>
#include <sys/bus.h>
#include <sys/conf.h>
#include <sys/cons.h>
#include <sys/fcntl.h>
#include <sys/interrupt.h>
#include <sys/kernel.h>
#include <sys/malloc.h>
#include <sys/reboot.h>
#include <machine/bus.h>
#include <sys/rman.h>
#include <sys/termios.h>
#include <sys/tty.h>
#include <machine/resource.h>
#include <machine/stdarg.h>
#include <dev/uart/uart.h>
#include <dev/uart/uart_bus.h>
#include <dev/uart/uart_cpu.h>
#include "uart_if.h"
#define UART_MINOR_CALLOUT 0x10000
static cn_probe_t uart_cnprobe;
static cn_init_t uart_cninit;
static cn_term_t uart_cnterm;
static cn_getc_t uart_cngetc;
static cn_checkc_t uart_cncheckc;
static cn_putc_t uart_cnputc;
CONS_DRIVER(uart, uart_cnprobe, uart_cninit, uart_cnterm, uart_cngetc,
uart_cncheckc, uart_cnputc, NULL);
static d_open_t uart_tty_open;
static d_close_t uart_tty_close;
static d_ioctl_t uart_tty_ioctl;
static struct cdevsw uart_cdevsw = {
Device megapatch 4/6: Introduce d_version field in struct cdevsw, this must always be initialized to D_VERSION. Flip sense of D_NOGIANT flag to D_NEEDGIANT, this involves removing four D_NOGIANT flags and adding 145 D_NEEDGIANT flags.
2004-02-21 21:10:55 +00:00
.d_version = D_VERSION,
Use standard style for cdevsw initializtion
2004-02-14 20:01:24 +00:00
.d_open = uart_tty_open,
.d_close = uart_tty_close,
.d_ioctl = uart_tty_ioctl,
.d_name = uart_driver_name,
Device megapatch 4/6: Introduce d_version field in struct cdevsw, this must always be initialized to D_VERSION. Flip sense of D_NOGIANT flag to D_NEEDGIANT, this involves removing four D_NOGIANT flags and adding 145 D_NEEDGIANT flags.
2004-02-21 21:10:55 +00:00
.d_flags = D_TTY | D_NEEDGIANT,
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
};
static struct uart_devinfo uart_console;
static void
uart_cnprobe(struct consdev *cp)
{
cp->cn_pri = CN_DEAD;
KASSERT(uart_console.cookie == NULL, ("foo"));
if (uart_cpu_getdev(UART_DEV_CONSOLE, &uart_console))
return;
if (uart_probe(&uart_console))
return;
cp->cn_pri = (boothowto & RB_SERIAL) ? CN_REMOTE : CN_NORMAL;
cp->cn_arg = &uart_console;
}
static void
uart_cninit(struct consdev *cp)
{
struct uart_devinfo *di;
/*
* Yedi trick: we need to be able to define cn_dev before we go
* single- or multi-user. The problem is that we don't know at
* this time what the device will be. Hence, we need to link from
* the uart_devinfo to the consdev that corresponds to it so that
* we can define cn_dev in uart_bus_attach() when we find the
* device during bus enumeration. That's when we'll know what the
* the unit number will be.
*/
di = cp->cn_arg;
KASSERT(di->cookie == NULL, ("foo"));
di->cookie = cp;
di->type = UART_DEV_CONSOLE;
uart_add_sysdev(di);
uart_init(di);
}
static void
uart_cnterm(struct consdev *cp)
{
uart_term(cp->cn_arg);
}
static void
uart_cnputc(struct consdev *cp, int c)
{
uart_putc(cp->cn_arg, c);
}
static int
uart_cncheckc(struct consdev *cp)
{
return (uart_poll(cp->cn_arg));
}
static int
uart_cngetc(struct consdev *cp)
{
return (uart_getc(cp->cn_arg));
}
static void
uart_tty_oproc(struct tty *tp)
{
struct uart_softc *sc;
KASSERT(tp->t_dev != NULL, ("foo"));
sc = tp->t_dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return;
/*
* Handle input flow control. Note that if we have hardware support,
* we don't do anything here. We continue to receive until our buffer
* is full. At that time we cannot empty the UART itself and it will
* de-assert RTS for us. In that situation we're completely stuffed.
* Without hardware support, we need to toggle RTS ourselves.
*/
if ((tp->t_cflag & CRTS_IFLOW) && !sc->sc_hwiflow) {
if ((tp->t_state & TS_TBLOCK) &&
(sc->sc_hwsig & UART_SIG_RTS))
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DRTS);
else if (!(tp->t_state & TS_TBLOCK) &&
!(sc->sc_hwsig & UART_SIG_RTS))
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DRTS|UART_SIG_RTS);
}
if (tp->t_state & TS_TTSTOP)
return;
if ((tp->t_state & TS_BUSY) || sc->sc_txbusy)
return;
if (tp->t_outq.c_cc == 0) {
ttwwakeup(tp);
return;
}
sc->sc_txdatasz = q_to_b(&tp->t_outq, sc->sc_txbuf, sc->sc_txfifosz);
tp->t_state |= TS_BUSY;
UART_TRANSMIT(sc);
ttwwakeup(tp);
}
static int
uart_tty_param(struct tty *tp, struct termios *t)
{
struct uart_softc *sc;
int databits, parity, stopbits;
KASSERT(tp->t_dev != NULL, ("foo"));
sc = tp->t_dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return (ENODEV);
if (t->c_ispeed != t->c_ospeed && t->c_ospeed != 0)
return (EINVAL);
/* Fixate certain parameters for system devices. */
if (sc->sc_sysdev != NULL) {
t->c_ispeed = t->c_ospeed = sc->sc_sysdev->baudrate;
t->c_cflag |= CLOCAL;
t->c_cflag &= ~HUPCL;
}
if (t->c_ospeed == 0) {
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DDTR | UART_SIG_DRTS);
return (0);
}
switch (t->c_cflag & CSIZE) {
case CS5: databits = 5; break;
case CS6: databits = 6; break;
case CS7: databits = 7; break;
default: databits = 8; break;
}
stopbits = (t->c_cflag & CSTOPB) ? 2 : 1;
if (t->c_cflag & PARENB)
parity = (t->c_cflag & PARODD) ? UART_PARITY_ODD
: UART_PARITY_EVEN;
else
parity = UART_PARITY_NONE;
Test the return value of UART_PARAM(). Invalid line parameters did not result in an error before. PR: kern/60284 Submitted by: Thomas Sandford <freebsduser@paradisegreen.co.uk>
2004-02-14 05:54:39 +00:00
if (UART_PARAM(sc, t->c_ospeed, databits, stopbits, parity) != 0)
return (EINVAL);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DDTR | UART_SIG_DTR);
/* Set input flow control state. */
if (!sc->sc_hwiflow) {
if ((t->c_cflag & CRTS_IFLOW) && (tp->t_state & TS_TBLOCK))
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DRTS);
else
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DRTS | UART_SIG_RTS);
} else
UART_IOCTL(sc, UART_IOCTL_IFLOW, (t->c_cflag & CRTS_IFLOW));
/* Set output flow control state. */
if (sc->sc_hwoflow)
UART_IOCTL(sc, UART_IOCTL_OFLOW, (t->c_cflag & CCTS_OFLOW));
ttsetwater(tp);
return (0);
}
static void
uart_tty_stop(struct tty *tp, int rw)
{
struct uart_softc *sc;
KASSERT(tp->t_dev != NULL, ("foo"));
sc = tp->t_dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return;
if (rw & FWRITE) {
if (sc->sc_txbusy) {
sc->sc_txbusy = 0;
UART_FLUSH(sc, UART_FLUSH_TRANSMITTER);
}
tp->t_state &= ~TS_BUSY;
}
if (rw & FREAD) {
UART_FLUSH(sc, UART_FLUSH_RECEIVER);
sc->sc_rxget = sc->sc_rxput = 0;
}
}
void
uart_tty_intr(void *arg)
{
struct uart_softc *sc = arg;
struct tty *tp;
int c, pend, sig, xc;
if (sc->sc_leaving)
return;
pend = atomic_readandclear_32(&sc->sc_ttypend);
if (!(pend & UART_IPEND_MASK))
return;
tp = sc->sc_u.u_tty.tp;
if (pend & UART_IPEND_RXREADY) {
while (!uart_rx_empty(sc) && !(tp->t_state & TS_TBLOCK)) {
xc = uart_rx_get(sc);
c = xc & 0xff;
if (xc & UART_STAT_FRAMERR)
c |= TTY_FE;
if (xc & UART_STAT_PARERR)
c |= TTY_PE;
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_rint(tp, c);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
}
if (pend & UART_IPEND_BREAK) {
if (tp != NULL && !(tp->t_iflag & IGNBRK))
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_rint(tp, 0);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
if (pend & UART_IPEND_SIGCHG) {
sig = pend & UART_IPEND_SIGMASK;
if (sig & UART_SIG_DDCD)
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_modem(tp, sig & UART_SIG_DCD);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
if ((sig & UART_SIG_DCTS) && (tp->t_cflag & CCTS_OFLOW) &&
!sc->sc_hwoflow) {
if (sig & UART_SIG_CTS) {
tp->t_state &= ~TS_TTSTOP;
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_start(tp);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
} else
tp->t_state |= TS_TTSTOP;
}
}
if (pend & UART_IPEND_TXIDLE) {
tp->t_state &= ~TS_BUSY;
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_start(tp);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
}
int
uart_tty_attach(struct uart_softc *sc)
{
struct tty *tp;
tp = ttymalloc(NULL);
sc->sc_u.u_tty.tp = tp;
sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[0] = make_dev(&uart_cdevsw,
device_get_unit(sc->sc_dev), UID_ROOT, GID_WHEEL, 0600, "ttyu%r",
device_get_unit(sc->sc_dev));
sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[0]->si_drv1 = sc;
sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[0]->si_tty = tp;
sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[1] = make_dev(&uart_cdevsw,
device_get_unit(sc->sc_dev) | UART_MINOR_CALLOUT, UID_UUCP,
GID_DIALER, 0660, "uart%r", device_get_unit(sc->sc_dev));
sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[1]->si_drv1 = sc;
sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[1]->si_tty = tp;
tp->t_oproc = uart_tty_oproc;
tp->t_param = uart_tty_param;
tp->t_stop = uart_tty_stop;
if (sc->sc_sysdev != NULL && sc->sc_sysdev->type == UART_DEV_CONSOLE) {
Catch up with the console interface change: the use of makedev() has been abandoned in favor of a (device) name-based approach. Submitted by: phk Tested on: alpha
2003-09-26 18:10:30 +00:00
sprintf(((struct consdev *)sc->sc_sysdev->cookie)->cn_name,
"ttyu%r", device_get_unit(sc->sc_dev));
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
swi_add(&tty_ithd, uart_driver_name, uart_tty_intr, sc, SWI_TTY,
INTR_TYPE_TTY, &sc->sc_softih);
return (0);
}
int uart_tty_detach(struct uart_softc *sc)
{
ithread_remove_handler(sc->sc_softih);
destroy_dev(sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[0]);
destroy_dev(sc->sc_u.u_tty.si[1]);
/* ttyfree(sc->sc_u.u_tty.tp); */
return (0);
}
static int
uart_tty_open(dev_t dev, int flags, int mode, struct thread *td)
{
struct uart_softc *sc;
struct tty *tp;
int error;
sc = dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return (ENODEV);
tp = dev->si_tty;
loop:
if (sc->sc_opened) {
KASSERT(tp->t_state & TS_ISOPEN, ("foo"));
/*
* The device is open, so everything has been initialized.
* Handle conflicts.
*/
if (minor(dev) & UART_MINOR_CALLOUT) {
if (!sc->sc_callout)
return (EBUSY);
} else {
if (sc->sc_callout) {
if (flags & O_NONBLOCK)
return (EBUSY);
error = tsleep(sc, TTIPRI|PCATCH, "uartbi", 0);
if (error)
return (error);
sc = dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return (ENODEV);
goto loop;
}
}
if (tp->t_state & TS_XCLUDE && suser(td) != 0)
return (EBUSY);
} else {
KASSERT(!(tp->t_state & TS_ISOPEN), ("foo"));
/*
* The device isn't open, so there are no conflicts.
* Initialize it. Initialization is done twice in many
* cases: to preempt sleeping callin opens if we are
* callout, and to complete a callin open after DCD rises.
*/
sc->sc_callout = (minor(dev) & UART_MINOR_CALLOUT) ? 1 : 0;
tp->t_dev = dev;
tp->t_cflag = TTYDEF_CFLAG;
tp->t_iflag = TTYDEF_IFLAG;
tp->t_lflag = TTYDEF_LFLAG;
tp->t_oflag = TTYDEF_OFLAG;
tp->t_ispeed = tp->t_ospeed = TTYDEF_SPEED;
ttychars(tp);
error = uart_tty_param(tp, &tp->t_termios);
if (error)
return (error);
/*
* Handle initial DCD.
*/
if ((sc->sc_hwsig & UART_SIG_DCD) || sc->sc_callout)
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_modem(tp, 1);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
/*
* Wait for DCD if necessary.
*/
if (!(tp->t_state & TS_CARR_ON) && !sc->sc_callout &&
!(tp->t_cflag & CLOCAL) && !(flags & O_NONBLOCK)) {
error = tsleep(TSA_CARR_ON(tp), TTIPRI|PCATCH, "uartdcd", 0);
if (error)
return (error);
sc = dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return (ENODEV);
goto loop;
}
error = ttyopen(dev, tp);
if (error)
return (error);
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
error = ttyld_open(tp, dev);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
if (error)
return (error);
KASSERT(tp->t_state & TS_ISOPEN, ("foo"));
sc->sc_opened = 1;
return (0);
}
static int
uart_tty_close(dev_t dev, int flags, int mode, struct thread *td)
{
struct uart_softc *sc;
struct tty *tp;
sc = dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return (ENODEV);
tp = dev->si_tty;
if (!sc->sc_opened) {
KASSERT(!(tp->t_state & TS_ISOPEN), ("foo"));
return (0);
}
KASSERT(tp->t_state & TS_ISOPEN, ("foo"));
if (sc->sc_hwiflow)
UART_IOCTL(sc, UART_IOCTL_IFLOW, 0);
if (sc->sc_hwoflow)
UART_IOCTL(sc, UART_IOCTL_OFLOW, 0);
if (sc->sc_sysdev == NULL)
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DDTR | UART_SIG_DRTS);
Add support for using uart(4) for pulse capturing for the Pulse Per Second (PPS) timing interface. The support is non-optional and by default uses the DCD line signal as the pulse input. A compile-time option (UART_PPS_ON_CTS) can be used to have uart(4) use the CTS line signal. Include <sys/timepps.h> in uart_bus.h to avoid having to add the inclusion of that header in all source files. Reviewed by: phk
2003-09-11 23:06:42 +00:00
/* Disable pulse capturing. */
sc->sc_pps.ppsparam.mode = 0;
Machine generated patch which changes linedisc calls from accessing linesw[] directly to using the ttyld...() functions The ttyld...() functions ar inline so there is no performance hit.
2004-06-04 16:02:56 +00:00
ttyld_close(tp, flags);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
ttyclose(tp);
wakeup(sc);
wakeup(TSA_CARR_ON(tp));
KASSERT(!(tp->t_state & TS_ISOPEN), ("foo"));
sc->sc_opened = 0;
return (0);
}
static int
uart_tty_ioctl(dev_t dev, u_long cmd, caddr_t data, int flags,
struct thread *td)
{
struct uart_softc *sc;
struct tty *tp;
int bits, error, sig;
sc = dev->si_drv1;
if (sc == NULL || sc->sc_leaving)
return (ENODEV);
tp = dev->si_tty;
Make the remaining serial drivers call ttyioctl() rather than calling the linedisc directly.
2004-06-04 08:02:37 +00:00
error = ttyioctl(dev, cmd, data, flags, td);
if (error != ENOTTY)
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
return (error);
Add support for using uart(4) for pulse capturing for the Pulse Per Second (PPS) timing interface. The support is non-optional and by default uses the DCD line signal as the pulse input. A compile-time option (UART_PPS_ON_CTS) can be used to have uart(4) use the CTS line signal. Include <sys/timepps.h> in uart_bus.h to avoid having to add the inclusion of that header in all source files. Reviewed by: phk
2003-09-11 23:06:42 +00:00
error = 0;
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
switch (cmd) {
case TIOCSBRK:
UART_IOCTL(sc, UART_IOCTL_BREAK, 1);
break;
case TIOCCBRK:
UART_IOCTL(sc, UART_IOCTL_BREAK, 0);
break;
case TIOCSDTR:
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DDTR | UART_SIG_DTR);
break;
case TIOCCDTR:
UART_SETSIG(sc, UART_SIG_DDTR);
break;
case TIOCMSET:
bits = *(int*)data;
sig = UART_SIG_DDTR | UART_SIG_DRTS;
if (bits & TIOCM_DTR)
sig |= UART_SIG_DTR;
if (bits & TIOCM_RTS)
sig |= UART_SIG_RTS;
UART_SETSIG(sc, sig);
break;
case TIOCMBIS:
bits = *(int*)data;
sig = 0;
if (bits & TIOCM_DTR)
sig |= UART_SIG_DDTR | UART_SIG_DTR;
if (bits & TIOCM_RTS)
sig |= UART_SIG_DRTS | UART_SIG_RTS;
UART_SETSIG(sc, sig);
break;
case TIOCMBIC:
bits = *(int*)data;
sig = 0;
if (bits & TIOCM_DTR)
sig |= UART_SIG_DDTR;
if (bits & TIOCM_RTS)
sig |= UART_SIG_DRTS;
UART_SETSIG(sc, sig);
break;
case TIOCMGET:
sig = sc->sc_hwsig;
bits = TIOCM_LE;
if (sig & UART_SIG_DTR)
bits |= TIOCM_DTR;
if (sig & UART_SIG_RTS)
bits |= TIOCM_RTS;
if (sig & UART_SIG_DSR)
bits |= TIOCM_DSR;
if (sig & UART_SIG_CTS)
bits |= TIOCM_CTS;
if (sig & UART_SIG_DCD)
bits |= TIOCM_CD;
if (sig & (UART_SIG_DRI | UART_SIG_RI))
bits |= TIOCM_RI;
*(int*)data = bits;
break;
default:
Add support for using uart(4) for pulse capturing for the Pulse Per Second (PPS) timing interface. The support is non-optional and by default uses the DCD line signal as the pulse input. A compile-time option (UART_PPS_ON_CTS) can be used to have uart(4) use the CTS line signal. Include <sys/timepps.h> in uart_bus.h to avoid having to add the inclusion of that header in all source files. Reviewed by: phk
2003-09-11 23:06:42 +00:00
error = pps_ioctl(cmd, data, &sc->sc_pps);
if (error == ENODEV)
error = ENOTTY;
break;
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
Add support for using uart(4) for pulse capturing for the Pulse Per Second (PPS) timing interface. The support is non-optional and by default uses the DCD line signal as the pulse input. A compile-time option (UART_PPS_ON_CTS) can be used to have uart(4) use the CTS line signal. Include <sys/timepps.h> in uart_bus.h to avoid having to add the inclusion of that header in all source files. Reviewed by: phk
2003-09-11 23:06:42 +00:00
return (error);
The uart(4) driver is an universal driver for various UART hardware. It improves on sio(4) in the following areas: o Fully newbusified to allow for memory mapped I/O. This is a must for ia64 and sparc64, o Machine dependent code to take full advantage of machine and firm- ware specific ways to define serial consoles and/or debug ports. o Hardware abstraction layer to allow the driver to be used with various UARTs, such as the well-known ns8250 family of UARTs, the Siemens sab82532 or the Zilog Z8530. This is especially important for pc98 and sparc64 where it's common to have different UARTs, o The notion of system devices to unkludge low-level consoles and remote gdb ports and provides the mechanics necessary to support the keyboard on sparc64 (which is UART based). o The notion of a kernel interface so that a UART can be tied to something other than the well-known TTY interface. This is needed on sparc64 to present the user with a device and ioctl handling suitable for a keyboard, but also allows us to cleanly hide an UART when used as a debug port. Following is a list of features and bugs/flaws specific to the ns8250 family of UARTs as compared to their support in sio(4): o The uart(4) driver determines the FIFO size and automaticly takes advantages of larger FIFOs and/or additional features. Note that since I don't have sufficient access to 16[679]5x UARTs, hardware flow control has not been enabled. This is almost trivial to do, provided one can test. The downside of this is that broken UARTs are more likely to not work correctly with uart(4). The need for tunables or knobs may be large enough to warrant their creation. o The uart(4) driver does not share the same bumpy history as sio(4) and will therefore not provide the necessary hooks, tweaks, quirks or work-arounds to deal with once common hardware. To that extend, uart(4) supports a subset of the UARTs that sio(4) supports. The question before us is whether the subset is sufficient for current hardware. o There is no support for multiport UARTs in uart(4). The decision behind this is that uart(4) deals with one EIA RS232-C interface. Packaging of multiple interfaces in a single chip or on a single expansion board is beyond the scope of uart(4) and is now mostly left for puc(4) to deal with. Lack of hardware made it impossible to actually implement such a dependency other than is present for the dual channel SAB82532 and Z8350 SCCs. The current list of missing features is: o No configuration capabilities. A set of tunables and sysctls is being worked out. There are likely not going to be any or much compile-time knobs. Such configuration does not fit well with current hardware. o No support for the PPS API. This is partly dependent on the ability to configure uart(4) and partly dependent on having sufficient information to implement it properly. As usual, the manpage is present but lacks the attention the software has gotten.
2003-09-06 23:13:47 +00:00
}
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink