nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
It looks like the exported kernel function global_flush_tlb disappeared going from 2.6.24 to 2.6.25, and the change_page_attr function has been throughout replaced with new functions. The nvidia module depends on them, so it doesn't build anymore on amd64. Is an experimental new nvidia-kernel-source version fixing this available somewhare? Or, as an alternative, does any kernel guru know how to replace the calls to these functions in the nvidia kernel module to use the new kernel API? Thanks in advance Giacomo -- _ Giacomo Mulas [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ OSSERVATORIO ASTRONOMICO DI CAGLIARI Str. 54, Loc. Poggio dei Pini * 09012 Capoterra (CA) Tel. (OAC): +39 070 71180 248 Fax : +39 070 71180 222 Tel. (UNICA): +39 070 675 4916 _ When the storms are raging around you, stay right where you are (Freddy Mercury) _ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 01:59:33PM +0200, Giacomo Mulas wrote: It looks like the exported kernel function global_flush_tlb disappeared going from 2.6.24 to 2.6.25, and the change_page_attr function has been throughout replaced with new functions. The nvidia module depends on them, so it doesn't build anymore on amd64. Is an experimental new nvidia-kernel-source version fixing this available somewhare? Or, as an alternative, does any kernel guru know how to replace the calls to these functions in the nvidia kernel module to use the new kernel API? I am working on it. 173.08 builds fine with 2.6.25 so if nothing else I can compare 169.12 with 173.08 and see what nvidia changed to get around the change. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
On Wed, 14 May 2008 15:50:15 +0200, Lennart Sorensen wrote: I am working on it. 173.08 builds fine with 2.6.25 so if nothing else I can compare 169.12 with 173.08 and see what nvidia changed to get around the change. Lennart, bug #476504, and in particular this comment: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=476504#32 worked just fine for me. Maybe you should just include the patch from nvidia? -- Best Regards, Jack Linux User #264449 Powered by Debian GNU/Linux on AMD64 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:33:07PM +, Jack Malmostoso wrote: On Wed, 14 May 2008 15:50:15 +0200, Lennart Sorensen wrote: I am working on it. 173.08 builds fine with 2.6.25 so if nothing else I can compare 169.12 with 173.08 and see what nvidia changed to get around the change. Lennart, bug #476504, and in particular this comment: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=476504#32 worked just fine for me. Maybe you should just include the patch from nvidia? That patch does NOT compile for me with 2.6.25-2-amd64 which just entered Debian unstable. I made a patch based on 173.08's changes which does compile. It's a bit longer than the patch mentioned in that bug report but apparently the extra changes are relevant to some things. So it might have been fine for 2.6.25-1 but isn't good enough for 2.6.25-2. -- LeN Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:20:15 +0200, Lennart Sorensen wrote: That patch does NOT compile for me with 2.6.25-2-amd64 which just entered Debian unstable. I made a patch based on 173.08's changes which does compile. It's a bit longer than the patch mentioned in that bug report but apparently the extra changes are relevant to some things. So it might have been fine for 2.6.25-1 but isn't good enough for 2.6.25-2. That's funny. It still works just fine for me: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l nvidia-kernel-2.6.25* [cut] ii nvidia-kernel-2.6.25-1-amd64 169.12-1 +2.6.25-1NVIDIA binary kernel module for Linux 2.6.25-1-amd64 ii nvidia-kernel-2.6.25-2-amd64 169.12-1 +2.6.25-2NVIDIA binary kernel module for Linux 2.6.25-2-amd64 I mean, it's not a big deal since you're working on the new driver version, but it would surely be interesting understanding why it works for me and not for others. -- Best Regards, Jack Linux User #264449 Powered by Debian GNU/Linux on AMD64 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
Someone have a prepacked debian way version with that patch and this work with 2.6.25-2-amd64 too... it's stable enough 173.08? anyone have this debian way packed? On 5/14/08, Lennart Sorensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:33:07PM +, Jack Malmostoso wrote: On Wed, 14 May 2008 15:50:15 +0200, Lennart Sorensen wrote: I am working on it. 173.08 builds fine with 2.6.25 so if nothing else I can compare 169.12 with 173.08 and see what nvidia changed to get around the change. Lennart, bug #476504, and in particular this comment: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=476504#32 worked just fine for me. Maybe you should just include the patch from nvidia? That patch does NOT compile for me with 2.6.25-2-amd64 which just entered Debian unstable. I made a patch based on 173.08's changes which does compile. It's a bit longer than the patch mentioned in that bug report but apparently the extra changes are relevant to some things. So it might have been fine for 2.6.25-1 but isn't good enough for 2.6.25-2. -- LeN Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Perhaps the depth of love can be calibrated by the number of different selves that are actively involved in a given relationship. Carl Sagan (Contact) Jaime Ochoa Malagón Arquitecto de SolucionesCel: +52 (55) 1021 0774 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ia32 library repository, conclusion
El dc 14 de 05 de 2008 a les 05:10 +0200, en/na Goswin von Brederlow va escriure: Can you repeat instructions where to get the source for creating your repository and the repository itself again? The last url I saw did just give a permission denied. I repeat (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=464796#40), The apt source is: deb http://62.43.64.122/debian/ lenny main contrib non-free The apt key can be found here: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=35;filename=ia32-jasp.asc;att=1;bug=464796 The unofficial package that creates the repository is debia32. There's some documentation there. Instructions for packages marked as compile manually were given as bugs (maybe already closed) in their respective packages. I can send the last resulting patch if someone needs it. And I repeat (http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ia32-libs-maintainers/2008-April/06.html), do not click the repository link, you won't be authorized. The mirroring is expected to resume and won't have that limitation. If you want to browse the repository do rsync to 62.43.64.122::ia32. Note that I'll have to readjust libc6-i386 dependencies to return to the official libc6 and rebuild again. As for the future direction of ia32-libs there have been some discussions with ftp-master as well. Here's a summary: - No package in main Depends/Build-Depends on converted 32bit libs (last exception is wine which is to be rectified) I never understood that part of the policy. Why a main source package that produces a useful set of main binary packages can't produce additional contrib or non-free packages? How do you solve that? What would be nice would be to integrate a repository of converted packages (or the i386 packages needed for conversion) on the debian amd64/ia64 CD/DVD images. It would indeed. But if the official position is to convert from the i386 mirror or use a separate one, then it's gonna be a conversion from the i386 CD set or use a separate one. That could be a mini-CD (you should try Architecture: all, even with /emul/ia32-linux/), current files are ~142MB. Bye. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 06:58:01PM +, Jack Malmostoso wrote: That's funny. It still works just fine for me: Yeah it does. I screwed up when I tried it. My mistake. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l nvidia-kernel-2.6.25* [cut] ii nvidia-kernel-2.6.25-1-amd64 169.12-1 +2.6.25-1NVIDIA binary kernel module for Linux 2.6.25-1-amd64 ii nvidia-kernel-2.6.25-2-amd64 169.12-1 +2.6.25-2NVIDIA binary kernel module for Linux 2.6.25-2-amd64 I mean, it's not a big deal since you're working on the new driver version, but it would surely be interesting understanding why it works for me and not for others. Well nvidia still lists 169.12 as the current stable version. I am not quite sure what they think 173.08 is, other than a driver that also happens to support 9xxx series cards and 2.6.25 kernel. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvidia-kernel modules and 2.6.25?
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 03:13:24PM -0500, Jaime Ochoa Malagón wrote: Someone have a prepacked debian way version with that patch and this work with 2.6.25-2-amd64 too... it's stable enough 173.08? anyone have this debian way packed? I do, running on my mtytv box for testing. I was trying to see if it helped the seg fault problem on my 8600GT, although I have found out that problem is caused by using nvidia's libwfb rather than xorg's libwfb so that will be fixed in the 169.12 package soon (I hope). No issues with the 173.08 driver in the first 30 hours though. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Intel compiler for amd64
On amd64 lenny I would like to upgrade the Intel icc and ifort compilers, installing the latest ones. Along my files I have taken notice how to convert rmp to deb with alien (at that time it was am64 etch). However, I am in doubt now which file to download (eg for C++): Product for Intel(R) 64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_intel64.tar.gz 39 MB Product for IA-64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_ia64.tar.gz 70 MB Thanks francesco pietra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intel compiler for amd64
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 02:51:47PM -0700, Francesco Pietra wrote: On amd64 lenny I would like to upgrade the Intel icc and ifort compilers, installing the latest ones. Along my files I have taken notice how to convert rmp to deb with alien (at that time it was am64 etch). However, I am in doubt now which file to download (eg for C++): Product for Intel(R) 64l_cc_p_10.1.015_intel64.tar.gz 39 MB Product for IA-64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_ia64.tar.gz 70 MB Not the IA64. IA64 = itanium. em64t would be equivelant to amd64. Perhaps that's what intel 64 means. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intel compiler for amd64
Hello, on my amd64 Etch, I installed the intel64 ball: it rocks. Note that, amazingly, some ia32 packages are needed :-) Jerome Lennart Sorensen wrote: On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 02:51:47PM -0700, Francesco Pietra wrote: On amd64 lenny I would like to upgrade the Intel icc and ifort compilers, installing the latest ones. Along my files I have taken notice how to convert rmp to deb with alien (at that time it was am64 etch). However, I am in doubt now which file to download (eg for C++): Product for Intel(R) 64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_intel64.tar.gz 39 MB Product for IA-64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_ia64.tar.gz 70 MB Not the IA64. IA64 = itanium. em64t would be equivelant to amd64. Perhaps that's what intel 64 means. -- Jerome BENOIT jgmbenoit_at_mailsnare_dot_net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ia32 library repository, conclusion
Javier Serrano Polo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: El dc 14 de 05 de 2008 a les 05:10 +0200, en/na Goswin von Brederlow va escriure: Can you repeat instructions where to get the source for creating your repository and the repository itself again? The last url I saw did just give a permission denied. I repeat (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=464796#40), The apt source is: deb http://62.43.64.122/debian/ lenny main contrib non-free [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% wget -S http://62.43.64.122/debian/ --2008-05-15 05:20:12-- http://62.43.64.122/debian/ Connecting to 62.43.64.122:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 03:20:12 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.8 (Debian) Content-Length: 286 Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 2008-05-15 05:20:12 ERROR 403: Forbidden. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% wget -S http://62.43.64.122/debian/dists/lenny/main/source/Sources.gz --2008-05-15 05:21:45-- http://62.43.64.122/debian/dists/lenny/main/source/Sources.gz Connecting to 62.43.64.122:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 03:21:45 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.8 (Debian) Content-Length: 316 Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 2008-05-15 05:21:45 ERROR 404: Not Found. No browsing and no sources. - No package in main Depends/Build-Depends on converted 32bit libs (last exception is wine which is to be rectified) I never understood that part of the policy. Why a main source package that produces a useful set of main binary packages can't produce additional contrib or non-free packages? How do you solve that? It can produce contrib packages. It can not produce non-free packages as that would imply the source is already non-free (not DFSG compliant). What would be nice would be to integrate a repository of converted packages (or the i386 packages needed for conversion) on the debian amd64/ia64 CD/DVD images. It would indeed. But if the official position is to convert from the i386 mirror or use a separate one, then it's gonna be a conversion from the i386 CD set or use a separate one. That could be a mini-CD (you should try Architecture: all, even with /emul/ia32-linux/), current files are ~142MB. Or fetch (or fetch and convert) the packages during the CD building. It would be simple to have the following layout on the CD: dists/lenny/main/binary-amd64/ dists/lenny/main/debian-installer/binary-amd64/ dists/lenny/main/i386/binary-amd64/ for already converted packages or dists/lenny/main/binary-amd64/ dists/lenny/main/binary-i386/ dists/lenny/main/debian-installer/binary-amd64/ for conversion at the users system. But someone has to dig into debianCD, understand it and add a patch for it. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intel compiler for amd64
Jerome BENOIT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello, on my amd64 Etch, I installed the intel64 ball: it rocks. Note that, amazingly, some ia32 packages are needed :-) Jerome Lennart Sorensen wrote: On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 02:51:47PM -0700, Francesco Pietra wrote: On amd64 lenny I would like to upgrade the Intel icc and ifort compilers, installing the latest ones. Along my files I have taken notice how to convert rmp to deb with alien (at that time it was am64 etch). However, I am in doubt now which file to download (eg for C++): Product for Intel(R) 64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_intel64.tar.gz 39 MB Product for IA-64 l_cc_p_10.1.015_ia64.tar.gz 70 MB Not the IA64. IA64 = itanium. em64t would be equivelant to amd64. Perhaps that's what intel 64 means. As there seem to be a few users of it maybe you could band together and generate something along the lines of java-package. As some of our customers use the icc I'm happy to test and give feedback but I fear my time is short enough already for me to start such a project. So call this a RFP. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
