* Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
@ 2004-10-14 14:53 Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-14 22:16 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Joakim Tjernlund @ 2004-10-14 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
working properly yet.
Jocke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 14:53 Merge 8xx to Linus tree? Joakim Tjernlund
@ 2004-10-14 22:16 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-14 22:29 ` Joakim Tjernlund
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2004-10-14 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joakim Tjernlund; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
>
> I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> working properly yet.
I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 22:16 ` Tom Rini
@ 2004-10-14 22:29 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-14 22:25 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-15 8:16 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-29 12:07 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Joakim Tjernlund @ 2004-10-14 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> > Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> >
> > I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> > soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> > depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> > working properly yet.
>
> I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> 2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
This is great news, thanks.
Jocke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 22:29 ` Joakim Tjernlund
@ 2004-10-14 22:25 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-14 22:41 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2004-10-14 22:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joakim Tjernlund; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> > > Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> > >
> > > I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> > > soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> > > depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> > > working properly yet.
> >
> > I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> > 2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> > to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> > depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
>
> This is great news, thanks.
what does this mean in terms of urgency in getting changes into the
8xx stuff, then? does this imply a fixed window of opportunity in the
near future, or does it mean that once stuff starts to get moved
upstream, it will get moved on a regular basis? just curious.
rday
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 22:25 ` Robert P. J. Day
@ 2004-10-14 22:41 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-17 11:03 ` Robert P. J. Day
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2004-10-14 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: Joakim Tjernlund, linuxppc-embedded
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 06:25:54PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> > > >
> > > > I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> > > > soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> > > > depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> > > > working properly yet.
> > >
> > > I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> > > 2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> > > to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> > > depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
> >
> > This is great news, thanks.
>
> what does this mean in terms of urgency in getting changes into the
> 8xx stuff, then? does this imply a fixed window of opportunity in the
> near future, or does it mean that once stuff starts to get moved
> upstream, it will get moved on a regular basis? just curious.
Once upstream, new changes won't (unless not-fully-baked) go into
linuxppc-2.5.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 22:41 ` Tom Rini
@ 2004-10-17 11:03 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-17 12:30 ` Dale Farnsworth
2004-10-18 14:49 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2004-10-17 11:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 06:25:54PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > what does this mean in terms of urgency in getting changes into the
> > 8xx stuff, then? does this imply a fixed window of opportunity in the
> > near future, or does it mean that once stuff starts to get moved
> > upstream, it will get moved on a regular basis? just curious.
>
> Once upstream, new changes won't (unless not-fully-baked) go into
> linuxppc-2.5.
um ... sorry, i'm still not sure what this means. does it mean that,
at some point (to be determined/announced?), the linuxppc-2.5 tree
will be put to the side, and all further mods should be done directly
against the 2.5 tree?
rday
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-17 11:03 ` Robert P. J. Day
@ 2004-10-17 12:30 ` Dale Farnsworth
2004-10-18 3:21 ` Dan Malek
2004-10-18 14:49 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Dale Farnsworth @ 2004-10-17 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:03:52AM +0000, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > Once upstream, new changes won't (unless not-fully-baked) go into
> > linuxppc-2.5.
>
> um ... sorry, i'm still not sure what this means. does it mean that,
> at some point (to be determined/announced?), the linuxppc-2.5 tree
> will be put to the side, and all further mods should be done directly
> against the 2.5 tree?
Yes, that's already the case for most ppc platforms. The only thing
that keeps it from being true for 8xx is that it doesn't work yet
in the linux-2.5 tree.
-Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-17 12:30 ` Dale Farnsworth
@ 2004-10-18 3:21 ` Dan Malek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Dan Malek @ 2004-10-18 3:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dale Farnsworth; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Oct 17, 2004, at 8:30 AM, Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> Yes, that's already the case for most ppc platforms. The only thing
> that keeps it from being true for 8xx is that it doesn't work yet
> in the linux-2.5 tree.
That's not all of it. The 8xx doesn't work in any 2.5/2.6 tree, but
there is still stuff that hasn't moved from linuxppc-2.5 into linux-2.5,
just like we left lots of stuff behind in the linuxppc-2.4 tree. Kinda
sad this happens.
-- Dan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-17 11:03 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-17 12:30 ` Dale Farnsworth
@ 2004-10-18 14:49 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2004-10-18 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list
On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 07:03:52AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 06:25:54PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > what does this mean in terms of urgency in getting changes into the
> > > 8xx stuff, then? does this imply a fixed window of opportunity in the
> > > near future, or does it mean that once stuff starts to get moved
> > > upstream, it will get moved on a regular basis? just curious.
> >
> > Once upstream, new changes won't (unless not-fully-baked) go into
> > linuxppc-2.5.
>
> um ... sorry, i'm still not sure what this means. does it mean that,
> at some point (to be determined/announced?), the linuxppc-2.5 tree
> will be put to the side, and all further mods should be done directly
> against the 2.5 tree?
As has been the goal for a long time, yes.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 22:16 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-14 22:29 ` Joakim Tjernlund
@ 2004-10-15 8:16 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-29 12:07 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2004-10-15 8:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: Joakim Tjernlund, linuxppc-embedded
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> > Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> >
> > I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> > soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> > depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> > working properly yet.
>
> I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward.
> Once 2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really
> intends to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over
> and make it depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
not like anyone here would care, but i'm pretty sure that it was my
carping and whining some time back on LKML that inspired someone to
add the extra options to the kernel config process regarding the
selections to pick only drivers expected to compile cleanly, etc.
this was based on my having, once too often, done a kernel compile and
having the compile fail because a selected driver was just plain
broken (from memory, it was a riscom driver that no one cared about
anymore).
see? sometimes the squeaky wheel really does get the grease. (or
maybe they did it just to shut me up. hard to believe ...)
rday
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-14 22:16 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-14 22:29 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-15 8:16 ` Robert P. J. Day
@ 2004-10-29 12:07 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 12:12 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 14:19 ` Tom Rini
2 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Joakim Tjernlund @ 2004-10-29 12:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> > Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> >
> > I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> > soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> > depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> > working properly yet.
>
> I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> 2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
>
> --
> Tom Rini
Any progress?
Jocke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 12:07 ` Joakim Tjernlund
@ 2004-10-29 12:12 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 12:27 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 14:19 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Pantelis Antoniou @ 2004-10-29 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joakim Tjernlund; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
>>>
>>>I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
>>>soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
>>>depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
>>>working properly yet.
>>>
>>>
>>I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
>>2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
>>to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
>>depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
>>
>>--
>>Tom Rini
>>
>>
>
>Any progress?
>
> Jocke
>_______________________________________________
>Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
>https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>
>
>
>
I'm currently battling to make 2.6.10-rc1 work the same way it used do.
But something changed in slab management and the kmallocs in request_irq
called by init_IRQ fails.
2.6.9-rc1 works.
ARGHHHHHHHHHH.
Ahem.
Regards
Pantelis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 12:12 ` Pantelis Antoniou
@ 2004-10-29 12:27 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 12:54 ` Pantelis Antoniou
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Joakim Tjernlund @ 2004-10-29 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pantelis Antoniou; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> >>On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> >>>
> >>>I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> >>>soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> >>>depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> >>>working properly yet.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> >>2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> >>to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> >>depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
> >>
> >>--
> >>Tom Rini
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Any progress?
> >
> > Jocke
> >_______________________________________________
> >Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> >Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> >https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
> >
> >
> >
> >
> I'm currently battling to make 2.6.10-rc1 work the same way it used do.
>
> But something changed in slab management and the kmallocs in request_irq
> called by init_IRQ fails.
hmm, I think I saw something about that in the www log for Linus kernel. It is offline so
I can't check now.
The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
Jocke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 12:27 ` Joakim Tjernlund
@ 2004-10-29 12:54 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 14:22 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Pantelis Antoniou @ 2004-10-29 12:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joakim Tjernlund; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
>>>>>
>>>>>I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
>>>>>soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
>>>>>depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
>>>>>working properly yet.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
>>>>2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
>>>>to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
>>>>depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Tom Rini
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Any progress?
>>>
>>>Jocke
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>>>Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
>>>https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I'm currently battling to make 2.6.10-rc1 work the same way it used do.
>>
>>But something changed in slab management and the kmallocs in request_irq
>>called by init_IRQ fails.
>>
>
>hmm, I think I saw something about that in the www log for Linus kernel. It is offline so
>I can't check now.
>
>The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
>are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
>
> Jocke
>
>
>
Found the bug.
IRQ code is now common for all arches, but ppc used a special
irq_kmalloc routine, since request irq was called very early.
The generic code just calls straight kmalloc, which obviously craps out
when too early.
Lets see what can I do to fix it...
BTW I'm curious if any embedded PPC actually works on 2.6.10...
Regards
Pantelis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 12:54 ` Pantelis Antoniou
@ 2004-10-29 14:22 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-29 14:23 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 14:35 ` Joakim Tjernlund
0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2004-10-29 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pantelis Antoniou; +Cc: Joakim Tjernlund, linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 03:54:00PM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> >>Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> >>>>>soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> >>>>>depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> >>>>>working properly yet.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> >>>>2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> >>>>to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> >>>>depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
> >>>
> >>I'm currently battling to make 2.6.10-rc1 work the same way it used do.
> >>
> >>But something changed in slab management and the kmallocs in request_irq
> >>called by init_IRQ fails.
> >>
> >
> >hmm, I think I saw something about that in the www log for Linus kernel.
> >It is offline so
> >I can't check now.
> >
> >The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc
> >tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
> >are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
BitMover has been moving and upgrading the machines of late, I think
this is done now.
> Found the bug.
>
> IRQ code is now common for all arches, but ppc used a special
> irq_kmalloc routine, since request irq was called very early.
>
> The generic code just calls straight kmalloc, which obviously craps out
> when too early.
>
> Lets see what can I do to fix it...
>
> BTW I'm curious if any embedded PPC actually works on 2.6.10...
In 2.6.10-rc1 release? No. In linuxppc-2.5? Now, yes. The changes came
from Randy Vinson, to make request_irq() / openpic_hookup_cascade()
calls become arch_initcalls() which fixed at least some platforms. I
would guess 8xx will need something similar.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 14:22 ` Tom Rini
@ 2004-10-29 14:23 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 14:35 ` Joakim Tjernlund
1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Pantelis Antoniou @ 2004-10-29 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: Joakim Tjernlund, linuxppc-embedded
Tom Rini wrote:
[snip]
>In 2.6.10-rc1 release? No. In linuxppc-2.5? Now, yes. The changes came
>from Randy Vinson, to make request_irq() / openpic_hookup_cascade()
>calls become arch_initcalls() which fixed at least some platforms. I
>would guess 8xx will need something similar.
>
>
>
In linuxppc-2.5 yes.
Just trying to catch up after my small period of absence...
Regards
Pantelis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 14:22 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-29 14:23 ` Pantelis Antoniou
@ 2004-10-29 14:35 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 14:49 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Joakim Tjernlund @ 2004-10-29 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini, Pantelis Antoniou; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
> > >The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc
> > >tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
> > >are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
>
> BitMover has been moving and upgrading the machines of late, I think
> this is done now.
I see. Doesn't seem like it is ready yet, the above URL:s are still dead.
Jocke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 14:35 ` Joakim Tjernlund
@ 2004-10-29 14:49 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-29 14:53 ` Joakim Tjernlund
0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2004-10-29 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joakim Tjernlund; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:35:21PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > >The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc
> > > >tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
> > > >are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
> >
> > BitMover has been moving and upgrading the machines of late, I think
> > this is done now.
>
> I see. Doesn't seem like it is ready yet, the above URL:s are still dead.
I would also guess that they've killed off the <repo>.bitkeeper.com
aliases, in favor of <repo>.bkbits.net
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 14:49 ` Tom Rini
@ 2004-10-29 14:53 ` Joakim Tjernlund
0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Joakim Tjernlund @ 2004-10-29 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:35:21PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > >The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc
> > > > >tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
> > > > >are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
> > >
> > > BitMover has been moving and upgrading the machines of late, I think
> > > this is done now.
> >
> > I see. Doesn't seem like it is ready yet, the above URL:s are still dead.
>
> I would also guess that they've killed off the <repo>.bitkeeper.com
> aliases, in favor of <repo>.bkbits.net
Yes, thats was it, thanks.
Jocke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
2004-10-29 12:07 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 12:12 ` Pantelis Antoniou
@ 2004-10-29 14:19 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2004-10-29 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joakim Tjernlund; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 02:07:12PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> > > Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
> > >
> > > I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
> > > soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to
> > > depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
> > > working properly yet.
> >
> > I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward. Once
> > 2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
> > to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
> > depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
>
> Any progress?
Not as much as I had hoped for. When I sat down to start on this, I
ended up pushing just some classic fixes for the IRQ changes. Hopefully
today I'll have this ready.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* RE: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
@ 2004-10-29 14:44 Rune Torgersen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Rune Torgersen @ 2004-10-29 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pantelis Antoniou, Tom Rini; +Cc: Joakim Tjernlund, linuxppc-embedded
One thing to look at...
On 8260 at least, I had to change use of request_irq in a PCI init
function to setup_irq()
Setup_irq is meant to be called before kmalloc works.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linuxppc-embedded-bounces@ozlabs.org=20
> [mailto:linuxppc-embedded-bounces@ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of=20
> Pantelis Antoniou
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 09:23
> To: Tom Rini
> Cc: Joakim Tjernlund; linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: Merge 8xx to Linus tree?
>=20
>=20
> Tom Rini wrote:
>=20
> [snip]
>=20
> >In 2.6.10-rc1 release? No. In linuxppc-2.5? Now, yes. The changes=20
> >came from Randy Vinson, to make request_irq() /=20
> >openpic_hookup_cascade() calls become arch_initcalls() which=20
> fixed at=20
> >least some platforms. I would guess 8xx will need something similar.
> >
> > =20
> >
> In linuxppc-2.5 yes.
>=20
> Just trying to catch up after my small period of absence...
>=20
> Regards
>=20
> Pantelis
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org=20
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>=20
>=20
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-10-29 14:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-10-14 14:53 Merge 8xx to Linus tree? Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-14 22:16 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-14 22:29 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-14 22:25 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-14 22:41 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-17 11:03 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-17 12:30 ` Dale Farnsworth
2004-10-18 3:21 ` Dan Malek
2004-10-18 14:49 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-15 8:16 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-29 12:07 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 12:12 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 12:27 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 12:54 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 14:22 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-29 14:23 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2004-10-29 14:35 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 14:49 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-29 14:53 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2004-10-29 14:19 ` Tom Rini
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-29 14:44 Rune Torgersen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).