rock@rancho.uucp (Rock Kent) (03/12/91)
FAS 2.08 is behaving as if the hardware flow control is incorrectly
set up and I can't figure out why. I'd appreciate hearing from
someone who understands the differences in how 2.07 and 2.08 deal with
flow control.
I've been running FAS successfully on a Microport V/386 3.0e system
since it was posted by Jim Murray in May, 1989. Most recently, I've
been running FAS 2.07 since Sep, 1990, with no problems. I'm running
into big problems, however, with a kernel made with FAS 2.08.
Under FAS 2.07, I defined NEED_INIT8250 in fas.h and, in space.c:
uint fas_modem [NUM_PHYSICAL_UNITS] =
{
EN_DTR | CA_DCD | UB_RING,
EN_DTR | CA_DCD | UB_RING
};
uint fas_flow [NUM_PHYSICAL_UNITS] =
{
HI_RTS | HO_CTS_ON_DSR,
HI_RTS | HO_CTS_ON_DSR
};
Under FAS 2.08, I tried defining NEED_INIT8250 in fas.h, compiling
with and without -DMERGE, and, in space.c:
ulong fas_modem [NUM_PHYSICAL_UNITS] =
{
EO_DTR | EI_DTR | CA_DCD,
EO_DTR | EI_DTR | CA_DCD
};
ulong fas_flow [NUM_PHYSICAL_UNITS] =
{
HI_RTS | HO_CTS_ON_DSR ,
HI_RTS | HO_CTS_ON_DSR
};
In both cases, I defined my devices as:
4, 48 Mar 11 18:47 /dev/tty00
4, 49 Mar 11 22:13 /dev/tty01
4,208 Mar 10 23:32 /dev/ttyM00
4,209 Mar 11 18:56 /dev/ttyM01
Under 2.07, the interface with a T2500 works correctly using CTS/RTS
flow control in full duplex mode, DCD on when carrier is detected, DSR
on when modem ready. Under 2.08, the line seems to be being stopped
by some random signal.
Like I said, I'd appreciate hearing from someone who understands the
differences in how 2.07 and 2.08 deal with flow control.
***************************************************************************
*Rock Kent rock@rancho.uucp POB 8964, Rancho Santa Fe, CA. 92067*
***************************************************************************gemini@geminix.in-berlin.de (Uwe Doering) (03/14/91)
rock@rancho.uucp (Rock Kent) writes: >FAS 2.08 is behaving as if the hardware flow control is incorrectly >set up and I can't figure out why. I'd appreciate hearing from >someone who understands the differences in how 2.07 and 2.08 deal with >flow control. > > >I've been running FAS successfully on a Microport V/386 3.0e system >since it was posted by Jim Murray in May, 1989. Just to be exact: FAS was developed and released by me, not by Jim Murray. However, FAS is based on an early release of Jim Murrays ASY replacement driver for Microport. >In both cases, I defined my devices as: > 4, 48 Mar 11 18:47 /dev/tty00 > 4, 49 Mar 11 22:13 /dev/tty01 > 4,208 Mar 10 23:32 /dev/ttyM00 > 4,209 Mar 11 18:56 /dev/ttyM01 This is the source of your problem. The minor device numbers have changed from FAS 2.07 to 2.08. Actually, this is mentioned in the release notes. You should use the default values for FAS 2.08, that is, 80, 81, 208 and 209, respectively. The mode you selected for the dial-out devices is half duplex (output only) hardware flow control. This wasn't available in FAS 2.07. Uwe -- Uwe Doering | INET : gemini@geminix.in-berlin.de Berlin |---------------------------------------------------------------- Germany | UUCP : ...!unido!fub!geminix.in-berlin.de!gemini
root@gold.sub.org (Christian Seyb) (03/17/91)
In <1991Mar12.052958.453@rancho.uucp> rock@rancho.uucp (Rock Kent) writes:
I won't get through to your mail address, so I post it:
One difference between 2.07 and 2.08 is, that the minor device numbers
have been changed (RTFM). They are now 80 and 81 instead of 48 and 49.
48 and 49 now means half duplex flow control (Which probably isn't what
you are looking for).
regards Christian
--
Christian Seyb | Internet: cs@gold.de.intel.com uucp login: nuucp
Fuchsweg 86 | Mailbox: +49-8106-34593 24h 300-19200 PEP/V.32
8011 Baldham | +49-8106-34692 24h 300-19200 HST
-- Wer nach allen Seiten offen ist, kann nicht ganz dicht sein.