[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Woody, Milo, XLT and 2.4.22



On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 09:16:01AM +0200, T. Weyergraf wrote:
> On 16 Sep, Jay Estabrook wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 02:00:02AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> 
> >> There is a kernel option that changes the address the kernel will
> >> reside at. Maybe you need to toggle it to the old address.
> > 
> > Correct; you need to say YES to the "Legacy Start Address" question,
> > for *all* MILO machine kernels.
> 
> Thanks for the hint, but I've tried that before posting on this list.
> No go.
> As a side question: Are more recent milo's ( such as 2.2.x ) still 
> affected ? I seem to recall, that this has been fixed.

What version of MILO are you running?

Have you tried the last one I made, at:

	ftp.digital.com/pub/DEC/Linux-Alpha/TESTING/xlt-milo.img

That one is based on 2.2.18, IIRC.

> Anyway, I tried and it didn't solve my problem. To me, it seems that 
> something alpha-specific has changed in recent kernels, that might break
> milo's jump-to-kernel.
> 
> Has anybody successfully build and run a kernel, that meets the
> following criteria:
> 
> 1. Version >= 2.4.22 ( including -bk and -pre series and/or even
>    2.6.0-test... )
> 2. Build using the "correct" alpha arch-type, instead on "Generic"
> 3. Is being loaded/started by Milo

Yes, I did such today, with:

1. 2.6.0-test4 (with a very small set of generic Alpha patches)
2. built for Alcor/Alpha-XLT and EV56 (my XLT is 366)
3. booted from the MILO mentioned above.

It ran quite nicely, too, though I needed to use DE4X5 instead of TULIP
to handle the onboard 2104x chipset.

Let me know if you want patches or config file...

 --Jay++

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay A Estabrook                            HPTC - LINUX support
Hewlett-Packard Company - MRO1-2/K15       (508) 467-2080
200 Forest Street, Marlboro MA 01752       Jay.Estabrook@hp.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: