From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id MAA58922 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:32:10 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: (from majordomo-owner@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) id MAA82918 for linux-list; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:31:33 -0800 (PST) mail_from (owner-linux@relay.engr.sgi.com) Received: from sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id MAA29122 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:31:32 -0800 (PST) mail_from (ulfc@bun.falkenberg.se) Received: from calypso.saturn (dialup89-3-7.swipnet.se [130.244.89.39]) by sgi.com (980327.SGI.8.8.8-aspam/980304.SGI-aspam: SGI does not authorize the use of its proprietary systems or networks for unsolicited or bulk email from the Internet.) via ESMTP id PAA01364 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:31:26 -0500 (EST) mail_from (ulfc@bun.falkenberg.se) Received: by bun.falkenberg.se via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.102) for linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 21:32:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 21:32:35 +0100 From: Ulf Carlsson To: Alex deVries Cc: Linux SGI Subject: Re: HAL2 support. Message-ID: <19990128213235.A2872@bun.falkenberg.se> Mail-Followup-To: Alex deVries , Linux SGI References: <19990128195021.A897@bun.falkenberg.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Alex deVries on Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 02:27:12PM -0500 Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk > I'll merge them with a modern kernel and make sure that it all builds > properly. That should be done in the next 30 hours. Woo! Finally! Kernel > work! As you wish. I have actually merged it before, I can send you an old patch so you can see what it should look like. > > And this line should actually be: > > } *h2_ctrl = (hal2_ctrl_regs *) KSEG1ADDR(H2_CTRL_PIO); > > Okay. Why's that? Because it has to be in the virtual address space. > Anyway, I'll get this code into the kernel so we have a way to debug it in > a distributed fashion. It's clear there'll be problems with it; we'll get > through that over time. Great.. - Ulf