Re: About support for rtVAX300

[Johnny Billquist <bqt%update.uu.se@localhost>]

On 2013-01-13 14:49, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2013-01-13 09:45, Holm Tiffe wrote:
> > Johnny Billquist wrote:
> >
> > > A few questions below, as I have a hard time following what you actually
> > > have done...
> > >
> > > On 2013-01-12 23:53, Holm Tiffe wrote:
> > > > [..]
> > > >
> > > > I'm no on that point, weher I should be able to talk with the UART.
> > > >
> > > > The machine boots int my (incomplete) scncnprobe().
> > > >
> > > > void
> > > > scncnprobe(struct consdev *cn)
> > > > {
> > > >
> > > > //static  vaddr_t dz_regs;
> > > >
> > > >          extern vaddr_t iospace;
> > > >          vaddr_t * du_base;
> > > >          int diagcons;
> > > >          paddr_t ioaddr = 0x20100000;
> > > >          extern const struct cdevsw scn_cdevsw;
> > > >
> > > >          switch(vax_boardtype) {
> > > >          case VAX_BTYP_RT300:
> > > >                  diagcons = 0;
> > > >                  break;
> > > >          default:
> > > >                  cn->cn_pri = CN_DEAD;
> > > >                  return;
> > > >          }
> > > >          if (diagcons)
> > > >                  cn->cn_pri = CN_REMOTE;
> > > >          else
> > > >                  cn->cn_pri = CN_NORMAL;
> > > >          cn->cn_dev = makedev(cdevsw_lookup_major(&scn_cdevsw),
> > > > diagcons);
> > > >          du_base = (void *)iospace;
> > > >          ioaccess(iospace, ioaddr, 1);
> > > >          du_base[0xc]=0xa;
> > > >          DELAY(10000);
> > > >          du_base[0xc]=(u_char)0x42;
> > > >          DELAY(10000);
> > > >          __asm("halt");
> > > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > ...and finally halts at bottom.
> > > > I've used that dz_vsbus.c as example and this is the very first call
> > > > to my driver.
> > > > The UART in this moment should be still poper initialized from the ROM
> > > > code, so writing to this Transmit buffer at 0x2010000c should print out
> > > > the char 'B'.
> > >
> > > I assume what you see is that it comes to the halt, but nothing is
> > > printed on the console, right?
> > >
> > > Check your assignment to iospace in your code... :-)
> > > (I hope you do understand what you are doing...)
> > [..]
> > > Yes, be more careful and observant when you write your code. :-)
> > >
> > >     Johnny
> >
> > No, I don't really know anymore what I'm doing there.
> >
> > void
> > dzcnprobe(struct consdev *cndev)
> > {
> >          extern  vaddr_t iospace;
> >          int diagcons;
> >          paddr_t ioaddr = 0x200A0000;
> >          extern const struct cdevsw dz_cdevsw;
> >
> >          switch (vax_boardtype) {
> >          case VAX_BTYP_410:
> >          case VAX_BTYP_420:
> >          case VAX_BTYP_43:
> >                  diagcons = (vax_confdata & 0x20 ? 3 : 0);
> >                  break;
> >
> >          case VAX_BTYP_46:
> >          case VAX_BTYP_48:
> >                  diagcons = (vax_confdata & 0x100 ? 3 : 0);
> >                  break;
> >
> >          case VAX_BTYP_49:
> >                  ioaddr = 0x25000000;
> >                  diagcons = (vax_confdata & 8 ? 3 : 0);
> >                  break;
> >
> >          case VAX_BTYP_53:
> >                  ioaddr = 0x25000000;
> >                  diagcons = 3;
> >                  break;
> >
> >          default:
> >                  cndev->cn_pri = CN_DEAD;
> >                  return;
> >          }
> >          if (diagcons)
> >                  cndev->cn_pri = CN_REMOTE;
> >          else
> >                  cndev->cn_pri = CN_NORMAL;
> >          cndev->cn_dev = makedev(cdevsw_lookup_major(&dz_cdevsw),
> > diagcons);
> >          dz_regs = iospace;
> >          dz = (void *)dz_regs;
> >          ioaccess(iospace, ioaddr, 1);
> >          dz->csr = 0;    /* Disable scanning until initting is done */
> >          dz->tcr = (1 << minor(cndev->cn_dev));    /* Turn on xmitter */
> >          dz->csr = 0x20; /* Turn scanning back on */
> > }
> >
> > ..and what would be different to that code.
> > Good to know that you know whats wrong. :-|
>
> I must have been tired. When I looked last night, it looked to me as if
> you had missed a zero in your address, but now it looks fine.
>
> So, what is the results? You are very cryptic about what you do, and
> what you actually observe.

Saw that you had figured out the volatile, which I thought about, but 
forgot to point out. That is a very important keyword, and must be used 
correctly what playing with hardware. So the same goes for your playing 
with the TIL311.

So, you are getting a lot further now. Excellent. Now, I would totally 
ignore the registers you constantly get back to. Just getting pointers 
to whatever is not a problem until someone actually starts using those 
registers. And they might still not be a problem...

But are your problem right now that you think it reports too much 
memory? Am I understanding you right that you mean this board only have 
4MB? (That seems awfully little...)

        Johnny

--
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol