mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Brendan Simon]

I have managed to compile a zImage for the BSE target.  Great.  It took
a lot of trial and error to find out which options to leave out.  The
serial and serial-console support is an obvious one which seems natural
to include but causes the build to fail.

It fails to build if I include any of the following options.  I can't
remember the exact error messages but can post them later if it helps.
* CPU is too slow to handle full bandwidth.
* MS-DOS, VFAT filesystems.
* SMB network filesystems.

Has anyone had similar problems ?  Must other options be included for
any of these to work ?

I notice that the .config file has both 8xx and 6xx cpus defined even
though I've chosen 8xx/860.  Similarly, CONFIG_PARIDE_PARPORT=y even
though I don't enable it.  It looks as though there are some defaults
that are set regardless of what the user sets.  This worries me a bit,
especially having 8xx and 6xx cpus both defined.  Is this intentional ?

Thanks,
Brendan Simon.

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Dan Malek]

Brendan Simon wrote:

> It fails to build if I include any of the following options.  I can't
> remember the exact error messages but can post them later if it helps.
> * CPU is too slow to handle full bandwidth.

The cpu isn't too slow, so don't select this one.

> * MS-DOS, VFAT filesystems.
> * SMB network filesystems.

These are the result of generic VM changes and are not at all
related to 8xx.  You can't build them on any PPC machine in that
release.


> I notice that the .config file has both 8xx and 6xx cpus defined even
> though I've chosen 8xx/860.  Similarly, CONFIG_PARIDE_PARPORT=y even
> though I don't enable it.  It looks as though there are some defaults
> that are set regardless of what the user sets.

This has all been corrected in later releases.  I don't think any
of it was 8xx related as I didn't specifically change anything.

> .....This worries me a bit,
> especially having 8xx and 6xx cpus both defined.  Is this intentional ?

Well, you can either worry or fix it and get on with life.  Keep in
mind that the 8xx is really a minimal change to the Linux/PPC baseline.
If something doesn't work on the 8xx, and it is not specific to
the 8xx (like the file system stuff), chances are it doesn't work
for any PPC release.  Build it for a PMAC or something (you do have
some other PPC besides the 8xx, right?) and compare the results.
Remember, the 2.3.x CVS is a serious development tree, changing
every minute, and can go for many releases without running
properly in many aspects.  When you play in this sandbox you have
to expect things not to work correctly, and contribute to the
updates.

People have full multi-user, multiple network, PPP, web server
stuff running on 8xx platforms....and I never saw them post a
message to any of the PPC lists.....unfortunately no code updates
were posted either....


	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Brendan Simon]

Dan Malek wrote:

> > .....This worries me a bit,
> > especially having 8xx and 6xx cpus both defined.  Is this intentional ?
>
> Well, you can either worry or fix it and get on with life.  Keep in
> mind that the 8xx is really a minimal change to the Linux/PPC baseline.
> If something doesn't work on the 8xx, and it is not specific to
> the 8xx (like the file system stuff), chances are it doesn't work
> for any PPC release.  Build it for a PMAC or something (you do have
> some other PPC besides the 8xx, right?) and compare the results.

No, unfortunately I do not have access to a powermac.  My x86 laptop is just
about getting to the end of it's warranty and I am looking at upgrading in the
next month or so.  Since I have no desire to run DOS/Windows programs AND the
powerpc G3/G4 machines kick ass, I will probably upgrade to a PowerBook :)


> Remember, the 2.3.x CVS is a serious development tree, changing
> every minute, and can go for many releases without running
> properly in many aspects.  When you play in this sandbox you have
> to expect things not to work correctly, and contribute to the
> updates.

I do expect things not to work.  I do not know the kernel internals very well
and I am not confident in changing things willy nilly.  Reporting things to
the mailing list seems reasonable to me to see if others have seen similar
things and have found solutions.  I don't mind getting my hands dirty and
trying things but I would rather wait for some direction from others first so
I don't head down the wrong track and possibly stuff up something that didn't
really have a problem.

In a previous email you mentioned that the embedded-2.2.5 release is still the
most stable, but you recommended to me that the 2.3.10 kernels are the place
to start for new ports.  I think I will do the port for the 2.2.5 first and
then migrate it to the 2.3.x stuff later.  Does this sound reasonable ?

Brendan Simon.

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Graham Stoney]

Dan Malek writes:
> When you play in this sandbox you have to expect things not to work
> correctly, and contribute to the updates.

Accordingly, I offer the following changes, which were necessary to build a
kernel for the RPCg CLLF board with an 860T. (I assume this board has the same
software model as the RPX Lite, since there is no CLLF option). Both problems
relate to the Fast Ethernet Controller code, which didn't compile:


*** arch/ppc/8xx_io/fec.c.dist	Wed Sep 15 17:32:26 1999
--- arch/ppc/8xx_io/fec.c	Thu Sep 16 17:31:35 1999
***************
*** 820,826 ****
  
  /* Initialize the FEC Ethernet on 860T.
   */
! __initfunc(int fec_enet_init(void))
  {
  	struct net_device *dev;
  	struct fec_enet_private *fep;
--- 820,826 ----
  
  /* Initialize the FEC Ethernet on 860T.
   */
! int __init fec_enet_init(void)
  {
  	struct net_device *dev;
  	struct fec_enet_private *fep;


*** include/asm-ppc/rpxlite.h.dist	Thu Sep 16 17:30:04 1999
--- include/asm-ppc/rpxlite.h	Thu Sep 16 17:31:02 1999
***************
*** 56,61 ****
--- 56,65 ----
  #define HIOX_CSR_ENAUDIO	((uint)0x00000200)
  #define HIOX_CSR_RSTAUDIO	((uint)0x00000100)	/* 0 == reset */
  
+ /* Interrupt level assignments.
+ */
+ #define FEC_INTERRUPT	SIU_LEVEL1	/* FEC interrupt */
+ 
  /* We don't use the 8259.
  */
  #define NR_8259_INTS	0

Regards,
Graham

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Dan Malek]

Graham Stoney wrote:


> Accordingly, I offer the following changes, which were necessary to build a
> kernel for the RPCg CLLF board with an 860T.

The CLLF isn't a really a lite...it's a Classic with less stuff.
I am currently working on this now, and if you actually have a
CLLF (I don't know how you would) the FEC isn't going to work
because of the faulty magnetics on the board (not RPCg fault, the
manufacturer acknowledged an error after we found it).  The new
CLLFs will be available within a few days.



> *** arch/ppc/8xx_io/fec.c.dist  Wed Sep 15 17:32:26 1999

What is fec.c.dist?  It seems like I am always fixing this one.
I pretty sure I got it right in the 2.3.18 kernel.



> + /* Interrupt level assignments.
> + */
> + #define FEC_INTERRUPT SIU_LEVEL1      /* FEC interrupt */
> +

The CLLF will be built from the Classic configuration, so it
isn't appropriate to put this here.  There is also more that needs
to be added for the MII interrupts through a Port C bit.


	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Dan Malek]

Brendan Simon wrote:

> No, unfortunately I do not have access to a powermac.

I strongly recommend that anyone doing 8xx (or any PPC development)
use a PPC host of some type.  It is sooooo much easier.  No cross
development hassles, bytes in the proper world order, all of the
tools work......


> I do expect things not to work.


As I said, if it isn't directly 8xx related, you can probably
read about it on the other lists as well.


> .... I think I will do the port for the 2.2.5 first and
> then migrate it to the 2.3.x stuff later.  Does this sound reasonable ?

I think so.  After working with 2.3.18, 2.2.5 just feels "old".
In particular there are some configuration changes that work better
in the newer releases.

I wouldn't recommend 2.3.10 for anything right now.  In fact, I will
probably remove that tar image from the server the next time I visit.


	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Graham Stoney]

Dan Malek writes:
> The CLLF isn't a really a lite...it's a Classic with less stuff.

Right; I'm with you now.

> I am currently working on this now, and if you actually have a
> CLLF (I don't know how you would) the FEC isn't going to work
> because of the faulty magnetics on the board (not RPCg fault, the
> manufacturer acknowledged an error after we found it).  The new
> CLLFs will be available within a few days.

No, I don't have one yet; I'm just building the kernel in eager anticipation
for when the new CLLF with 860T hits my desk.

> What is fec.c.dist?  It seems like I am always fixing this one.

It's just what I renamed fec.c from the snapshot to before I hacked it.

> I pretty sure I got it right in the 2.3.18 kernel.

I'm using the linux-2.3.18 snapshot kernel from the ftp site, which has it
wrong I'm afraid.

> The CLLF will be built from the Classic configuration, so it
> isn't appropriate to put this here.  There is also more that needs
> to be added for the MII interrupts through a Port C bit.

I've reconfigured/recompiled my kernel for the Classic, but it sounds like it
won't Just Work(tm). I'm happy to alpha test any mods you're working on; once
the board & doco arrive, I can probably do some kernel hacking as well...

Thanks,
Graham

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: mpc8xx-2.3.10 configuration questions.

[Dan Malek]

Graham Stoney wrote:


> > I pretty sure I got it right in the 2.3.18 kernel.
> 
> I'm using the linux-2.3.18 snapshot kernel from the ftp site, which has it
> wrong I'm afraid.

Damn it!  I forgot to check it in and I don't have the new version
here at home with me.  I'll fix this and add the Ericsson updates,
make sure it works on the Classic and CLLF.


> I've reconfigured/recompiled my kernel for the Classic, but it sounds like it
> won't Just Work(tm).

The Classic should work, I just never finished all of the FEC
when I got stalled on the CLLF.  If anyone has a Classic, there is
a zero ohm resistor that must be installed to get the MII interrupt
to Port C.  I'll document this, too.


> ...I'm happy to alpha test any mods you're working on;


Oh, you will :-).



	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/