On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 01:06:49PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > Le Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 02:31:02PM +0000, Visa Hankala a écrit : > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 03:02:52PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > > > Le Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 07:50:56PM +0000, Miod Vallat a écrit : > > > > > hi, > > > > > > > > > > playing with 7.5 on an edgerouter poe, it panics at boot: > > > > The condition should be (port > 1 && octeon_boot_info->board_rev_major == > > 1). > > Otherwise the code skips a working port on the EdgeRouter Lite. > > The Lite uses the same board id but has board_rev_major == 2 as far > > as I know. > > sure, here's a new diff:
OK visa@ > RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/octeon/dev/cn30xxsmi.c,v > diff -u -r1.12 cn30xxsmi.c > --- cn30xxsmi.c 20 May 2024 23:13:33 -0000 1.12 > +++ cn30xxsmi.c 4 Jul 2024 11:04:59 -0000 > @@ -197,6 +197,10 @@ > reg = nutm25_phys[port]; > break; > case BOARD_UBIQUITI_E100: > + /* XXX Skip the switch port on ERPoe-5. > + * XXX There is no driver for it. */ > + if (port > 1 && octeon_boot_info->board_rev_major == > 1) > + return ENOENT; > case BOARD_UBIQUITI_E120: > if (port > 2) > return ENOENT; > > i didnt see any use for board_rev_major so i wrongly assumed that > https://github.com/openbsd/src/commit/2bbf581cd0b529f21a6f418a4467e74927b76dd5 > made a proper distinction between those. get_octeon_board() should make the distinction. The PoE should possibly use label BOARD_UBIQUITI_E101. However, I am hesitant to touch this code without going through a testing drill.
