Ok, here's what I came up with for a Solaris 10 patch. I don't know that
it's the best way, but I tried to make somewhat clean. Feel free to
rewrite/suggest anything. Note that Solaris 10 removed the ability to
compile libc static, and I don't know if we think it's worth the effort,
so I just made
Kaufman, Adam wrote:
Ok, here’s what I came up with for a Solaris 10 patch. I don’t know that
it’s the best way, but I tried to make somewhat clean. Feel free to
rewrite/suggest anything. Note that Solaris 10 removed the ability to
compile libc static, and I don’t know if we think it’s worth
Oops. Sorry. Here we go.
Signed-off-by: Adam Kaufman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Reinauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 8:58 AM
To: Kaufman, Adam
Cc: linuxbios@linuxbios.org
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] LinuxBIOS Solaris Dev
Kaufman, Adam
Roman Kononov wrote:
This set of changes makes Sun Ultra40 working. Although not fully.
The working parts are: single CPU and nForce 2200 (CK804 Pro) with
all stuff connected to it. The still-not-working parts are: second
CPU and nForce 2050 with all stuff connected to it.
The changed
Author: stepan
Date: 2007-02-02 18:08:04 +0100 (Fri, 02 Feb 2007)
New Revision: 2545
Modified:
trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/mainboard/amd/serengeti_leopard/Options.lb
trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/mainboard/tyan/s2891/Options.lb
trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/mainboard/tyan/s2895/Options.lb
Log:
Remove
On 2/2/07, Stefan Reinauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
committed-by can be retrieved from the svn system per revision.
I guess I am not being clear. What I want to see, in email, is that a
fix got committed. We recently saw a bunch of patches hit the list,
with signed-off-by, then acked-by, and
Hi Roman, this patch looks fine save for one thing: I believe that the
// comments were supposed to be deprecated. I can not find a reference
for this, however; anybody care to correct me?
signed,
a former // coment user
--
linuxbios mailing list
linuxbios@linuxbios.org
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 05:50:04PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Roman Kononov wrote:
This set of changes makes Sun Ultra40 working. Although not fully.
The working parts are: single CPU and nForce 2200 (CK804 Pro) with
all stuff connected to it. The still-not-working parts are:
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 10:40:34AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
Hi Roman, this patch looks fine save for one thing: I believe that the
// comments were supposed to be deprecated. I can not find a reference
for this, however; anybody care to correct me?
Well, not sure. // comments are valid
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 10:32:08AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
On 2/2/07, Stefan Reinauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
committed-by can be retrieved from the svn system per revision.
I guess I am not being clear. What I want to see, in email, is that a
fix got committed. We recently saw a
Uwe Hermann wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 10:40:34AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
Hi Roman, this patch looks fine save for one thing: I believe that the
// comments were supposed to be deprecated. I can not find a reference
for this, however; anybody care to correct me?
Well, not sure.
On 02/02/2007 11:58 AM, Uwe Hermann wrote:
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 05:50:04PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Could you please rediff with -w ? Something terribly broke the indenting.
I guess this was intended. It looks like Roman fixed the coding style(?)
E.g. replaced spaces with tabs in a
On 02/02/2007 12:08 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
IIRC the C99 standard is the first C standard to allow // comments.
I vote for allowing // comments since:
1. they are a C standard
2. they do not clutter so much
3. they make life easier for many people
4. the current code has too many
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 02:28:28PM -0600, Roman Kononov wrote:
On 02/02/2007 12:08 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
IIRC the C99 standard is the first C standard to allow // comments.
I vote for allowing // comments since:
Yeah, I agree. This is not so critical, IMHO. If we really
Roman Kononov wrote:
Rediffing with -w will not help. Fixing coding style first will not help
either. This is not as simple as a patch. It is a major re-writing.
The current code in the repository is half-finished and works only
by an accident. Reviewers should apply the patch and try to
On 02/02/2007 10:57 AM, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
I suggest comparing (rom + bytes - 1) rom_end, because rom_end seems
to be the logical border we're checking for.
(rom + bytes - 1 rom_end) equals to (rom + bytes rom_end + 1)
provided that
[rom,rom_end+1) does not cross 0x7fff+1 and
Author: rminnich
Date: 2007-02-02 23:40:10 +0100 (Fri, 02 Feb 2007)
New Revision: 2546
Modified:
trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/chip.h
trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/ck804_usb.c
Log:
I have Sun Ultra40 workstation. Southbridge is nVidia CrushK8-04/nforce
2200
On 2/1/07, Roman Kononov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have Sun Ultra40 workstation. Southbridge is nVidia CrushK8-04/nforce
2200 (too many names, sounds like a criminal).
1) Linuxbios loads kernel A; kernel A loads kernel B. Everything works fine.
2) Then I push the reset button.
3)
YES
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 2:40 PM
To: linuxbios@linuxbios.org
Subject: [LinuxBIOS] r2546 -
trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804
Author: rminnich
Date: 2007-02-02
We may consider moving ids to mcp55_ids.h later like kernel do. Instead
of tough pci_ids.h
YH
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Swierk
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:54 PM
To: LinuxBIOS
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] [PATCH] cleaned up
Good catch.
YH
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roman Kononov
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:25 PM
To: LinuxBIOS
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] [PATCH] amdk8_sysconf.h type corrected
This fixes a small typo.
Signed-off-by: Roman Kononov
Actually that is because of Andi's patch cause the problem.
I was wondering why we can not use these ram.
It is good if update kernel instead.
YH
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roman Kononov
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:37 PM
LinuxBIOS have three parts
1. linuxbios for init RAM, and Cache_as_RAM. Code is Flash, and
stack is in CACHE. From cache_as_ram_main()
2. linuxbios_ram: for PCI device handling. --- from hardwaremain()
Code is in ram and unzipped from rom by 1.
3. payload: it could be Etherboot (
Lu, Yinghai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually that is because of Andi's patch cause the problem.
I was wondering why we can not use these ram.
It is good if update kernel instead.
Yes. It looks like we have a little fallout from this cleanup.
There is a related issue with just reserving
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 08:45:53AM -0500, Kaufman, Adam wrote:
Ok, here's what I came up with for a Solaris 10 patch.
Could all of the defines be compressed into one place? Maybe one
mem.c per system and defines controlling the build process?
Am I being overzealous about portability?
Also, it
in the file src/cpu/amd/model_lx/model_lx_init.c
static void model_lx_init(device_t dev)
{
printk_debug(model_lx_init\n);
/* Turn on caching if we haven't already */
x86_enable_cache();
/* Enable the local cpu apics */
//setup_lapic();
// do VSA late init
On Saturday 03 February 2007 01:17, Lu, Yinghai wrote:
Actually that is because of Andi's patch cause the problem.
What patch?
-Andi
--
linuxbios mailing list
linuxbios@linuxbios.org
http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Please advise on suitability for the latest LinuxBIOS. The current BIOS
says net boot is possible, would like to use in LinuxBIOS. (Yes two
sound devices, m/b plus a PCI card.)
Thanks - very nice work you do
iWill KA266 motherboard (ATX) (*not* KA266-R variant)
CPU = AMD Athlon 1333 MHz
28 matches
Mail list logo
