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

Re: Version 0.9 of PA-RISC Linux Released

Thanks for the info - see in-lined comments below:

On Sun, 03 Jun 2001, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 09:42:11PM -0500, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> > Hi Folks -
> > Sub-Title this one: Adventures in running V0.9 on a HP9000/720 box:
> Well, 720 is explicitly mentioned as not yet being supported.  There seems
> to be a bug in the ASP driver, so SCSI and LAN don't work.  

Well, gee - I didn't know it wasn't supposed to work on a 720.
Would you swap me an e3000 for my hp9000/720?
Or should I try to fix this problem myself?
Or should I just wait?

SCSI and LAN - How about the EISA BA?
Note: The 9000/720 did not come standard with an EISA BA - it was an 
option - but my box has the option (no card in slot thought).

> In addition,
> the trap handler needs another case to handle 720 & family (traps 26,
> 27 and 28 are reported as trap 18 on this cpu, and which one needs to be
> distinguished.  there's a hack around which assumes this is a page-fault,
> but this will get you into an infinite loop in kernel space if user does
> unaligned data reference instead).  Oh, and I hear a rumor that this
> revision of the CPU does not allow user-space reads of %cr27, so we need
> to write a handler for this machine, or use non-floating stacks in glibc.

That sounds like a well defined problem - where can I get an assembly language
guide and internal arch. description for the PA-RISC1.1(c I believe - could be
anything from a-z)?

> Sounds like a bug in the STI code too then... helge, did you want a 720
> or 730 to play with?  :-)

I tried the 730_32STI kernel - it didn't work.  I have BUILT kernels that do work
from the earlier sources (I am still waiting for the new ones to finish arriving).

If there is a shortage of 9000/720 test boxes running around - just let me know
when you need anything "model 720 specific" tested (like a bootable kernel).

> That's expected behavior.  Richard, could we change the printk?

Good idea.  Even reading both the code and the comments, I couldn't tell if this
was reporting a failure or just an alternate mode of operation.
> Don't know.  Can't say I've tried the parallel port myself on any machine.

I'll let you know - I may have to use the printk hook to write to the parallel port
during boot-up before I get this thing running.

> I'm still xcompiling my kernels :-)  I know it's a stable build
> environment, and up until jsm & alan modra found the most recent bug,
> it had no known bugs...

I did read the warnings that it might not work on anything older than what was
available for testing.  So I am not complaining, just asking for help and/or 

> I can't say that I know those systems... these are old X terminals based on
> the i960 processor?  If so, I'm not aware of any work being done on these.

That's right - i960 processor based X terminals.  One model is disk-less, the
other one can support both internal floppy and hard drives.

I had to pay 100 US$ for this system - I would hate to have to throw away
two thirds of it.

Oh - I am not a HP-9000 expert (less than two weeks experience) - the prior
owner kept all of the manuals, invoices, customer training books, sales documents,
etc.  I am just quoting from what I have read in the old papers.


Reply to: