sio => uart: one port is gone

Andriy Gapon avg at
Mon Sep 15 16:28:43 UTC 2008

on 15/09/2008 18:58 Marcel Moolenaar said the following:
> On Sep 15, 2008, at 5:49 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> This is a fairly standard and old machine with 2 COM ports.
>> Recently (last Friday) I decided to update my RELENG_7 system and also 
>> to transition from sio to uart.
>> This what I had before the upgrade:
>> kernel: sio0: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 
>> flags 0x10 on acpi0
>> kernel: sio0: type 16550A
>> kernel: sio0: [FILTER]
>> kernel: sio1: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x2e8-0x2ef irq 3 on 
>> acpi0
>> kernel: sio1: type 16550A
>> kernel: sio1: [FILTER]
>> This is what I have now:
>> uart0: <16550 or compatible> at port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on isa0
>> uart0: [FILTER]
>> This is what I have in device.hints for uart:
>> hint.uart.0.port="0x3F8"
>> hint.uart.0.flags="0x10"
>> hint.uart.0.irq="4"
>> hint.uart.1.port="0x2F8"
>> hint.uart.1.irq="3"
>> Precisely the same hints (s/uart/sio/) I had for sio.
> The hints are bogus. As you can see, sio(4) attached to acpi(4),
> whereas uart(4) attaches to isa(4).

Yes and yes.

> Don't compile ACPI as a kernel module and all is fine.

What is the alternative?
Building it into a kernel? Is this maybe too much of a requirement?
 From /sys/i386/conf/NOTES (RELENG_7):
# Note that building ACPI into the kernel is deprecated; the module is
# normally loaded automatically by the loader.

Andriy Gapon

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list