Re: your mail

Krzysiek Taraszka
2002-09-01T09:54:11Z

On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Milton Miller wrote:

> At Fri Aug 30 2002 - 12:54:37 EST Krzysiek Taraszka (dzimi@pld.org.pl) wrote:
> > Great work, but in 2.2.22rc2 powerpc's still broken.
> > First of All Sources have got a lot of unsed stuff.
> > For example look like that:
> >
> > [dzimi@cyborg linux]$ rgrep -n -R '*.*' 'CONFIG_PPC64' .
> ...
>
> Doesn't sound like -rc (release canidate) changes.

Well yes, in 2.2.10 someone tried to add CONFIG_PPC64 support in to 2.2
kernel.
In 2.2.11 someone add CONFIG_PPC64 in to Config.in! but on 2.2.12 or
2.2.13 someone remove it ...
(without remove it from directory != arch/ppc/kernel/ )

> > Second kernel-2.2.21 still have got time init problems in symbios driver
> > on powerpc platform.
> > I send to you my ugly hack witch work, but IMHO he's ugly ;) I need to do
> > it correct.
>
> > Third, kernel for powerpc boot and work on g3-266 but on g3-333 Ops ...
> > (kernel traps, kernel wrote: Caused by SRR1 or somethink like that, in 2.3
> > i saw #define FIX_SRR1 macro ...)
>
> Well, SRR1 doesn't cause traps, but it does help tell you why they occurred.
> And the FIX_SRR1 stuff isn't the solution either if you look at it closer.
> How about a decoded oops? Also, you didn't say what platform you were using.

I used g3 (pmac). My based system was PLD with 2.4.18 tree.
I used gcc-2.95.4 to build 2.2.21 vmlinux.

> As far as the open-pic changes you posted, how about explaining what your
> trying to fix (partly hidden by the rename and move to chrp_setup.c from
> open_pic.c)?

I tried to fix problem witch is on my IBM RS/6000 (model b50).
Openpic can't initialize propertly my scsi system. (sym82c8xx scsi
driver). Some time init problems.

Oh I forgot, 2.2.22rc1/2 or kernel >= 2.2.16 (2.2 tree) didn't work on my
IBM RS/6000 (b50).
Build with egcs work, but work slow (Bogomips: 16MHz!) and won't reboot
and shutdown -h now.
The same code build with gcc Ops (Kernel Exception, look like openpic
allocation address.)
I'll post the Ops later.

> I see you are wrapping the 8259 checks, but it also refers to a few new
> functions/macros I didn't see defined.

Hmm, yes, that why my patch is ugly. I want to do this correctly.

> How about discussing these problems and patches over at
> linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org ? (I set the reply-to there).

Ok, but first of all i should subscribe there.

Krzysiek Taraszka (dzimi@pld.org.pl)