Re: Debian non-x86 kernel arches
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:20:06PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:18:56PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, i need to cleanup still the via-ide driver kludge i have there.
> > Still, i believe it breaks nothing on ppc since we probably are the only
> > one using via-ide there, but i wouldn't bet on that this kludge would
> > ever be accepted in the mainline kernels, nor that it would not break
> > stuff on non-ppc (well, x86 mostly).
>
> The via changes are almost guaranteed to break on x86. Any reason you
> can't simply assign the irqs in the arch-specific pci fixups code so
> the driver doesn't need to mess it? That's the way we usually deal
> with broken plattforms in linux.
Sure, that would be the right way i guess. I promise to do it once i get
time allotment for that again, in the meantime the current code works
and is of use to the pegasos users, so why keep it out.
> > More problematic will be the upcoming gigabit ethernet patch for the
> > discovery II, which break the existing (2.4) mips driver.
>
> Which driver is that? Have you talked to Ralf Baechle to get your
> changes tested on mips?
The discovery II is a northbridge controller which has a mips and ppc
version, and includes a gigabit ethernet controller, which has a (not
sure it is working though) driver for mips in 2.4. I am right now more
interested in having it working on ppc before contacting the mips folk
though about this, all in due time.
> This is what really *fucking* annoys me. This I'm lazy and unable to
> talk to someone else mentality that get us tons of cludges instead of
> working together.
Well, since you started this thread doing the same, you can hardly blame
me for it. Seriously though, i don't see what is your annoyance. It is a
matter of work priority, and upto recently, it was more important to
make sure the powerpc debian kernel worked on something else than just
powermacs, and that debian-installer worked fine on powerpc.
> > This should be
> > ok for a debian/ppc patch, but not for the mainstream kernel. Naturally,
> > more work needs to be done to have this integrable upstream, but well, i
> > guess you also don't know the answer on how to make the day have more
> > hours, do you ?
>
> It's pretty simple. By doing work right from the beginning. If you do
> thing sane from the start you'll have to care far less afterwards.
Yeah sure, patches are welcome then :)
And BTW, maybe the time you spent advocating a new centralized kernel
package maintenance would have been better spent helping solve some of
the known issue in the current powerpc kernel, and i didn't see you send
us patches or try to help out on that account.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: