From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3938FB56.F6900AB@pop.agri.ch> Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 14:34:37 +0200 From: Andreas Tobler Reply-To: toa@pop.agri.ch MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Takashi Oe CC: Linux -Dev Subject: Re: 7200 & bitkeeper/linuxcare devel? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Hi, Takashi Oe wrote: > > Hi, > > On Fri, 2 Jun 2000, Andreas Tobler wrote: > > > Hi, > > has anyone gotten a bitkeeper 2.4.0test1-ac7 or a linuxcare 2.3.99p9 to > > boot under a 7200? > > I think I know why the kernel fails to boot on your machine. I had to get > around this problem for my current project. I've sent a patch for it to > Paul about a week ago, but, so far, nothing happened yet. Just in case, > the same patch is attached here. > > In your last post, you had a xmon log which said something like "..... > vector: 700 ....", and I infer that kernel died with program check > exception. > > Anyway, in arch/ppc/kernel/time.c, timer_interrupt() and do_gettimeofday() > use "mftb" instruction which is not implemented in PPC 601, hence, the > exception. The patch workarounds this, but, personally, I feel the > previous implementation which just used DEC register was better than my > patch or the current one when all PPCs are considered. Well, I applied this patch to the bitkeeper 2.4.0-test1-ac7, bingo, it boots again. Until the detection of my adaptec happens. Boop. Here I get a resource conflict and the machine wants to reboot since all my disk are hanging on the 2940UW. This is a known problem for all linuxers, also the ia32 and others. Have to read the posts on lk about this. Right now I build a 2.3.99p9 from linuxcare with your patch. I expect it to boot since the adaptec stuff was broken on 2.4 up. So a big thanks to you Takashi, I can't say right now about the quality about the patch, I have to study it exactly. But so far I'm able to work further. Andreas ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/