On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 09:30:29AM +0200, Oliver Mangold wrote:
> On 08.10.2016 16:00, Greg KH wrote:
> > As this sequence hasn't changed in the Linux kernel at all, isn't this a
> > Grub issue?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> I guess as with any inconsistency between two systems it's a philosophical
> question which one is 'wrong'. Maybe an interesting question would be what
> other systems do nowadays. I have no idea, e.g. how Windows handles this,
> but I just checked Syslinux, and it seems to do the same as Grub2:
>
> --- /syslinux/core/include/bios.h ---
> #define SERIAL_BASE 0x0400 /* Base address for 4 serial ports */
> ...
> static inline uint16_t get_serial_port(uint16_t port)
> {
> /* Magic array in BIOS memory, contains four entries */
> const uint16_t * const serial_ports = (const uint16_t *)SERIAL_BASE;
>
> /*
> * If port > 3 then the port is simply the I/O base address
> */
> if (port > 3)
> return port;
>
> /* Get the I/O port from the BIOS */
> return serial_ports[port];
> }
But again, we haven't changed anything in Linux, and we can't suddenly
start enumerating the ports in a different way without breaking
something, right? So why not get syslinux or other bootloaders to do
what Linux does? Why must Linux suddenly change? :)
Also, might this just be a broken BIOS? Have you talked to the vendor
about this, they should be able to fix this quite easily. Odds are they
never even noticed...
thanks,
greg k-h
> ---
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
