[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sun Leo (ZX)

Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Martin Habets wrote:
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 02:41:25PM +0000, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Martin Habets wrote:
Does the kernel detect the card when booting? You should see something
like the following when booting:
/sbus@2,0/SUNW,leo@2,0: leo at x:x
Also you should have leo ranges in /proc/iomem and /proc/ioport.
Ahhh... no, I don't see that in dmsg or anything in those proc files. I can see the driver enabled in .config and I think that I'm running the appropriate kernel but it's obvious that I need to go and check.

Looking in drivers/video/leo.c leo_init() I see
        if (fb_get_options("leofb", NULL))
which leads me to suggest booting with option 'video=leofb:on'.

Doesn't help. dmesg still says it's using mono PROM, /proc/cmdline shows that the option is actually in there, there still appears to be nothing in /proc/iomem or /proc/ioports.

Am I correct in interpreting what you've said as meaning that X's "No devices detected" actually means "I'm not seeing the appropriate device support in the kernel"?

That's one option. It could also be the wrong device was specified in the

If I'm understanding you and Tom correctly I need to get to the point where the kernel loads the driver first, after that I can start looking at X again.

I think I could usefully put some printk()s in leo.c, but I need to sort out the disc before I have any chance of compiling that.

I'm back on this and I've been having fun with printk()s. What I can see is:

[MarkMLl] Entered leo_init()
[MarkMLl] In leo_init(), matched option
[MarkMLl] Entered of_register_driver()
[MarkMLl] driver_register() -> 0
[MarkMLl] of_register_driver() -> 0
Console: switching to mono PROM 80x34
rtc_init: no PC rtc found

I think that the return from driver_register() hence of_register_driver() indicates success so leo_init() is OK, however I don't see control being transferred into leo_probe().

What is the significance of the match check? I presume this is a device name but what is it tested against?

I'll continue tinkering with this but any thoughts would be appreciated.

Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

Reply to: