[PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[Osamu Tomita]

This patchset adds support for NEC PC-9800 architecture, against 2.5.43.
Fixed bad things commented by Russell King.

PC-9800 series machines are made by NEC. But sold only in japan.
Formaly, they were best sellers in japan.
We port linux for PC-9800 since 2.1.57.

I'm testing 2.5.43 with this patchset on some boxes.
- PC-9800 i586 UP with IDE drive
- PC-9800 i686 SMP with SCSI drive
- AT compatible with IDE drive (patch applied but not set CONFIG_PC9800).
They works well.
We are doing our best, patchset has no effect on original without configuring
for PC-9800.
Please apply this patchset.

Best regards
Osamu tomita  sf.jp Linux/98 project
-

This is part 1/26 of patchset.

Summary:
 APM related modules
  - adapted to BIOS spec. differences.

diffstat:
 arch/i386/kernel/apm.c   |   54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 include/linux/apm_bios.h |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff -urN linux/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c linux98/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c
--- linux/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c	Wed Oct 16 12:27:10 2002
+++ linux98/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c	Fri Oct 18 20:59:15 2002
@@ -223,6 +223,8 @@
 
 #include <linux/sysrq.h>
 
+#include "io_ports.h"
+
 extern rwlock_t xtime_lock;
 extern spinlock_t i8253_lock;
 extern unsigned long get_cmos_time(void);
@@ -588,6 +590,9 @@
 	__asm__ __volatile__(APM_DO_ZERO_SEGS
 		"pushl %%edi\n\t"
 		"pushl %%ebp\n\t"
+#ifdef CONFIG_PC9800
+		"pushfl\n\t"
+#endif
 		"lcall *%%cs:apm_bios_entry\n\t"
 		"setc %%al\n\t"
 		"popl %%ebp\n\t"
@@ -643,6 +648,9 @@
 		__asm__ __volatile__(APM_DO_ZERO_SEGS
 			"pushl %%edi\n\t"
 			"pushl %%ebp\n\t"
+#ifdef CONFIG_PC9800
+			"pushfl\n\t"
+#endif
 			"lcall *%%cs:apm_bios_entry\n\t"
 			"setc %%bl\n\t"
 			"popl %%ebp\n\t"
@@ -896,6 +904,7 @@
  
 static void apm_power_off(void)
 {
+#ifndef CONFIG_PC9800
 	unsigned char	po_bios_call[] = {
 		0xb8, 0x00, 0x10,	/* movw  $0x1000,ax  */
 		0x8e, 0xd0,		/* movw  ax,ss       */
@@ -905,11 +914,12 @@
 		0xb9, 0x03, 0x00,	/* movw  $0x0003,cx  */
 		0xcd, 0x15		/* int   $0x15       */
 	};
+#endif
 
 	/*
 	 * This may be called on an SMP machine.
 	 */
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && !defined(CONFIG_PC9800)
 	/* Some bioses don't like being called from CPU != 0 */
 	if (smp_processor_id() != 0) {
 		current->cpus_allowed = 1;
@@ -919,7 +929,11 @@
 	}
 #endif
 	if (apm_info.realmode_power_off)
+#ifndef CONFIG_PC9800
 		machine_real_restart(po_bios_call, sizeof(po_bios_call));
+#else
+		printk("PC-9800 does not support Realmode Power OFF\n");
+#endif
 	else
 		(void) set_system_power_state(APM_STATE_OFF);
 }
@@ -1174,11 +1188,11 @@
 {
 #ifdef INIT_TIMER_AFTER_SUSPEND
 	/* set the clock to 100 Hz */
-	outb_p(0x34,0x43);		/* binary, mode 2, LSB/MSB, ch 0 */
+	outb_p(0x34, PIT_MODE);		/* binary, mode 2, LSB/MSB, ch 0 */
 	udelay(10);
-	outb_p(LATCH & 0xff , 0x40);	/* LSB */
+	outb_p(LATCH & 0xff, PIT_CH0);	/* LSB */
 	udelay(10);
-	outb(LATCH >> 8 , 0x40);	/* MSB */
+	outb(LATCH >> 8, PIT_CH0);	/* MSB */
 	udelay(10);
 #endif
 }
@@ -1653,7 +1667,12 @@
 	      -1: Unknown
 	   8) min = minutes; sec = seconds */
 
-	p += sprintf(p, "%s %d.%d 0x%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x %d%% %d %s\n",
+	p += sprintf(p,
+#ifndef CONFIG_PC9800
+		     "%s %d.%d 0x%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x %d%% %d %s\n",
+#else
+		     "%s %d.%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x 0x%02x %d%% %d %s\n",
+#endif
 		     driver_version,
 		     (apm_info.bios.version >> 8) & 0xff,
 		     apm_info.bios.version & 0xff,
@@ -1677,6 +1696,8 @@
 	char *		power_stat;
 	char *		bat_stat;
 
+#if !defined(CONFIG_PC9800) || !defined(CONFIG_SMP)
+	/* Deamonize causes freeze on PC-9800 SMP box */
 	kapmd_running = 1;
 
 	daemonize();
@@ -1684,6 +1705,7 @@
 	strcpy(current->comm, "kapmd");
 	current->flags |= PF_IOTHREAD;
 	sigfillset(&current->blocked);
+#endif /* !CONFIG_PC9800 || !CONFIG_SMP */
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 	/* 2002/08/01 - WT
@@ -1714,6 +1736,17 @@
 				/* Fall back to an APM 1.0 connection. */
 				apm_info.connection_version = 0x100;
 			}
+#ifdef CONFIG_PC9800
+			else {
+				printk("PC-9801 APM BIOS BUG work around: "
+					"fix connection_version 0x%x to ",
+					apm_info.connection_version);
+				apm_info.connection_version =
+				(apm_info.connection_version & 0xff00)
+				| ((apm_info.connection_version & 0x00f0) >> 4);
+				printk("0x%x\n", apm_info.connection_version);
+			}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PC9800 */
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -1886,7 +1919,11 @@
 		return -ENODEV;
 	}
 	printk(KERN_INFO
+#ifndef CONFIG_PC9800
 		"apm: BIOS version %d.%d Flags 0x%02x (Driver version %s)\n",
+#else
+		"apm: BIOS version %d.%02x Flags 0x%02x (Driver version %s)\n",
+#endif
 		((apm_info.bios.version >> 8) & 0xff),
 		(apm_info.bios.version & 0xff),
 		apm_info.bios.flags,
@@ -1913,6 +1950,11 @@
 	if (apm_info.bios.version == 0x001)
 		apm_info.bios.version = 0x100;
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_PC9800
+	/* In PC-9800, APM BIOS version is written in BCD...?? */
+	apm_info.bios.version = (apm_info.bios.version & 0xff00)
+				| ((apm_info.bios.version & 0x00f0) >> 4);
+#endif
 	/* BIOS < 1.2 doesn't set cseg_16_len */
 	if (apm_info.bios.version < 0x102)
 		apm_info.bios.cseg_16_len = 0; /* 64k */
@@ -1988,7 +2030,11 @@
 	if (apm_proc)
 		SET_MODULE_OWNER(apm_proc);
 
+#if defined(CONFIG_PC9800) && defined(CONFIG_SMP)
+	apm(0);
+#else
 	kernel_thread(apm, NULL, CLONE_FS | CLONE_FILES | CLONE_SIGHAND | SIGCHLD);
+#endif
 
 	if (num_online_cpus() > 1) {
 		printk(KERN_NOTICE
diff -urN linux/include/linux/apm_bios.h linux98/include/linux/apm_bios.h
--- linux/include/linux/apm_bios.h	Wed Aug 28 09:52:31 2002
+++ linux98/include/linux/apm_bios.h	Wed Aug 28 13:34:09 2002
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
 typedef unsigned short	apm_eventinfo_t;
 
 #ifdef __KERNEL__
+#include <linux/config.h>
 
 #define APM_CS		(GDT_ENTRY_APMBIOS_BASE * 8)
 #define APM_CS_16	(APM_CS + 8)
@@ -60,6 +61,7 @@
 /*
  * The APM function codes
  */
+#ifndef CONFIG_PC9800
 #define	APM_FUNC_INST_CHECK	0x5300
 #define	APM_FUNC_REAL_CONN	0x5301
 #define	APM_FUNC_16BIT_CONN	0x5302
@@ -80,6 +82,28 @@
 #define	APM_FUNC_RESUME_TIMER	0x5311
 #define	APM_FUNC_RESUME_ON_RING	0x5312
 #define	APM_FUNC_TIMER		0x5313
+#else
+#define	APM_FUNC_INST_CHECK	0x9a00
+#define	APM_FUNC_REAL_CONN	0x9a01
+#define	APM_FUNC_16BIT_CONN	0x9a02
+#define	APM_FUNC_32BIT_CONN	0x9a03
+#define	APM_FUNC_DISCONN	0x9a04
+#define	APM_FUNC_IDLE		0x9a05
+#define	APM_FUNC_BUSY		0x9a06
+#define	APM_FUNC_SET_STATE	0x9a07
+#define	APM_FUNC_ENABLE_PM	0x9a08
+#define	APM_FUNC_RESTORE_BIOS	0x9a09
+#define	APM_FUNC_GET_STATUS	0x9a3a
+#define	APM_FUNC_GET_EVENT	0x9a0b
+#define	APM_FUNC_GET_STATE	0x9a0c
+#define	APM_FUNC_ENABLE_DEV_PM	0x9a0d
+#define	APM_FUNC_VERSION	0x9a3e
+#define	APM_FUNC_ENGAGE_PM	0x9a3f
+#define	APM_FUNC_GET_CAP	0x9a10
+#define	APM_FUNC_RESUME_TIMER	0x9a11
+#define	APM_FUNC_RESUME_ON_RING	0x9a12
+#define	APM_FUNC_TIMER		0x9a13
+#endif
 
 /*
  * Function code for APM_FUNC_RESUME_TIMER

Re: [PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[Dave Jones]

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:56:19AM +0900, Osamu Tomita wrote:
 > This patchset adds support for NEC PC-9800 architecture, against 2.5.43.
 > Fixed bad things commented by Russell King.
 > 
 > PC-9800 series machines are made by NEC. But sold only in japan.
 > Formaly, they were best sellers in japan.
 > We port linux for PC-9800 since 2.1.57.
 > 
 > I'm testing 2.5.43 with this patchset on some boxes.
 > - PC-9800 i586 UP with IDE drive
 > - PC-9800 i686 SMP with SCSI drive
 > - AT compatible with IDE drive (patch applied but not set CONFIG_PC9800).
 > They works well.
 > We are doing our best, patchset has no effect on original without configuring
 > for PC-9800.
 > Please apply this patchset.

The biggest sticking point as far as I'm concerned with this patchset
is the source readability after applying it.
Something really needs to be done about the #if pollution this
patch adds before it's ready for inclusion. The whole patchset adds
over 700 #if's/ifdefs/ifndefs.

In a lot of cases you even do this..

+#ifdef PC9800
+	unsigned long foo
+#endif

	...

+#ifdef PC9800
+ code using foo
+#endif

where foo could have been moved inside a {} section in the ifdef
which is using it.   This is one of the simpler cases, there's
also a whole bunch of stuff where you don't even need ifdefs at all
(around #defines for example)

I see you've gone to the effort of making sure the generated code
is the same if PC9800 support is compiled out, which is good.
The next step is to get the source clean enough that those that
don't care about PC9800 don't have to hurt their eyes untangling
a web of #if's.
		
		Dave

-- 
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: [PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture

[Osamu Tomita]

Thank you very much for many kindly advices.
I will do further cleanup.

Best regards
Osamu Tomita  sf.jp Linux/98 project
tomita@cinet.co.jp

Re: [PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:56:19AM +0900, Osamu Tomita wrote:
>  > This patchset adds support for NEC PC-9800 architecture, against 2.5.43.
>  > Fixed bad things commented by Russell King.
>  > 
>  > PC-9800 series machines are made by NEC. But sold only in japan.
>  > Formaly, they were best sellers in japan.
>  > We port linux for PC-9800 since 2.1.57.
>  > 
>  > I'm testing 2.5.43 with this patchset on some boxes.
>  > - PC-9800 i586 UP with IDE drive
>  > - PC-9800 i686 SMP with SCSI drive
>  > - AT compatible with IDE drive (patch applied but not set CONFIG_PC9800).
>  > They works well.
>  > We are doing our best, patchset has no effect on original without configuring
>  > for PC-9800.
>  > Please apply this patchset.
> 
> The biggest sticking point as far as I'm concerned with this patchset
> is the source readability after applying it.
> Something really needs to be done about the #if pollution this
> patch adds before it's ready for inclusion. The whole patchset adds
> over 700 #if's/ifdefs/ifndefs.

Indeed, I have the same comment after browsing through the frame buffer device
and console patches.

I think the need for 32-bit character/attribute data on PC-9800 can easily be
abstracted inside a few screen specific typedefs, macros, and functions, e.g.
  - add typedef u32/u16 charattr_t
  - add scr_kmalloc() to allocate virtual console buffers
  - modify scr_readw() and friends for character/attribute data access
and a lot of the #ifdef's can be removed.

What do you think?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[Osamu Tomita]

Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:56:19AM +0900, Osamu Tomita wrote:
> >  > This patchset adds support for NEC PC-9800 architecture, against 2.5.43.
> >  > Fixed bad things commented by Russell King.
> >  >
> >  > PC-9800 series machines are made by NEC. But sold only in japan.
> >  > Formaly, they were best sellers in japan.
> >  > We port linux for PC-9800 since 2.1.57.
> >  >
> >  > I'm testing 2.5.43 with this patchset on some boxes.
> >  > - PC-9800 i586 UP with IDE drive
> >  > - PC-9800 i686 SMP with SCSI drive
> >  > - AT compatible with IDE drive (patch applied but not set CONFIG_PC9800).
> >  > They works well.
> >  > We are doing our best, patchset has no effect on original without configuring
> >  > for PC-9800.
> >  > Please apply this patchset.
> >
> > The biggest sticking point as far as I'm concerned with this patchset
> > is the source readability after applying it.
> > Something really needs to be done about the #if pollution this
> > patch adds before it's ready for inclusion. The whole patchset adds
> > over 700 #if's/ifdefs/ifndefs.
> 
> Indeed, I have the same comment after browsing through the frame buffer device
> and console patches.
> 
> I think the need for 32-bit character/attribute data on PC-9800 can easily be
> abstracted inside a few screen specific typedefs, macros, and functions, e.g.
>   - add typedef u32/u16 charattr_t
>   - add scr_kmalloc() to allocate virtual console buffers
>   - modify scr_readw() and friends for character/attribute data access
> and a lot of the #ifdef's can be removed.
> 
> What do you think?
Indeed. I'll try it in next step. Thank you very much.

Regards
Osamu Tomita