Re: Some things are broken in 2.6.11 kernel
> I wanted to compile an 'official' 2.6.11 linux kernel (taken from
> www.kernel.org) for a sparc64 machine, and it failed on 2 points:
Have you also posted this to the SPARC kernel mailing list?
> * when configuring for SMP + preemptible kernel, spinlock_t and
> rwlock_t lack a new member, break_lock. This member is present in
> the sparc port, but not the sparc64. When adding it, the
> compilation process tells me somewhere:
> -----
> kernel/spinlock.c: In function `_read_lock':
> kernel/spinlock.c:250: warning: implicit declaration of function `read_can_lock'
> kernel/spinlock.c: In function `_write_lock':
> kernel/spinlock.c:251: warning: implicit declaration of function `write_can_lock'
> -----
Hmmm... this is a bit strange. These are macros declared in
include/linux/spinlock.h (althought there appear to be architecture
specific ones for a number of other architecture, but not SPARC(64))
which is included properly. Hmmm... have you tried looking at the
pre-processed code?
> * compilation of the ffb driver fails. A macro named DRM has
> apparently been removed, but some code still uses it (ffb_context.c
> at least).
>
> I haven't been further, as necessary changes in the ffb_context.c files are way
> beyond my knowledge... I'm pretty sure the link phase would also fail
> for the missing read_can_lock and write_can_lock identifiers, though.
>
> I haven't applied the 2.6.11.6 patch, but after a quick read, it
> doesn't solve these issues, and doesn't add anything specific to the
> sparc64 port.
Have you tried any of the Debian patches? IIRC there were 2.6.11
kernels for sun4u floating around a week or so ago.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2005/03/msg00057.html
HTH
Cheers,
- Martin
--
Martin
inkubus@interalpha.co.uk
"Seasons change, things come to pass"
Reply to: