On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 5:13 AM, <tsnsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > At Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:34:10 +0300, > Blue Swirl wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:48 PM, <tsnsa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > At Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:09:28 +0100, >> > Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: >> >> >> Nice series! >> >> >> May I ask what have you used as a test case to discover the problem? >> >> > >> >> > I found the problem when I was trying to run the linux/sparc64 kernel. >> >> > It seemed that copy_to_user() did not work as expected. >> >> >> >> That's good to hear. How far have you managed to get a 64-bit Linux >> >> kernel to boot to date? >> > >> > With dirty hacks other than the ldfa/stfa fixes, I have managed >> > to get the busybox shell prompt using a kernel with initramfs. >> > I'm planning to send other fixes after cleaning them up. >> >> Great! In which areas are the hacks needed? > > Roughly speaking I've added/changed the following so far: > - %fprs register dirty bits support
O, that's interesting. Does glibc use it? > - hardware interrupt handing (both interrupt controller and cpu side) > also needed to modify the openbios. Nice. A lot of work indeed. > - nonfaulting load ASI > glibc memcpy seems to use nonfaulting loads You mean other than the implemented 0x82/83 and 0x8a/8b ones, or that the current implementation is buggy? -- Regards, Artyom Tarasenko solaris/sparc under qemu blog: http://tyom.blogspot.com/
