public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* PC-9800 on 2.5.47-ac5
@ 2002-11-16 23:55 Osamu Tomita
  2002-11-17  0:47 ` Alan Cox
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Osamu Tomita @ 2002-11-16 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alan Cox; +Cc: LKML

Thanks Alan. 2.5.47-ac5 works fine for my PC-9800 box
 with additional patch. I put additional patch next URL.
http://downloads.sourceforge.jp/linux98/1561/linux98-2.5.47-ac5.patch.tar.bz2

But I met some not PC-9800 specific problems.
 - Doesn't boot when compile for i386 or i486.
 - Oops when remove a Card from CardBus socket.

Regards,
Osamu

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: PC-9800 on 2.5.47-ac5
  2002-11-16 23:55 PC-9800 on 2.5.47-ac5 Osamu Tomita
@ 2002-11-17  0:47 ` Alan Cox
  2002-11-17 12:19   ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2002-11-17  0:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Osamu Tomita; +Cc: LKML

On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 23:55, Osamu Tomita wrote:
> Thanks Alan. 2.5.47-ac5 works fine for my PC-9800 box
>  with additional patch. I put additional patch next URL.
> http://downloads.sourceforge.jp/linux98/1561/linux98-2.5.47-ac5.patch.tar.bz2


Thanks - I'm trying to fold bits in one at a time and to avoid lots of
messy ifdefs. BTW - have you tested the APM change as it seems to have
more pushes than pops for the stack ?

Also for the 386/486 crash was that with our without FPU and software
FPU emulation ?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: PC-9800 on 2.5.47-ac5
  2002-11-17  0:47 ` Alan Cox
@ 2002-11-17 12:19   ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2002-11-17 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alan Cox; +Cc: tomita, linux-kernel

On 17 Nov 2002 00:47:28 +0000 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Thanks - I'm trying to fold bits in one at a time and to avoid lots of
> messy ifdefs. BTW - have you tested the APM change as it seems to have
> more pushes than pops for the stack ?

I assumed that the PC-9800 must be using an iret instead of ret to get
back from the APM BIOS.  This is, of course, broken ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2002-11-17 12:13 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-11-16 23:55 PC-9800 on 2.5.47-ac5 Osamu Tomita
2002-11-17  0:47 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-17 12:19   ` Stephen Rothwell

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox