Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

--- Chris Newport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David S. Miller wrote: > >>In general, you should not need to have the Sun > firmware in your > >>drivers, just upload them to the card and array > from Solaris and they > >>will stay there in nvram. > > > >Not true if you boot from the SOC/SOCAL disk

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

David S. Miller wrote: In general, you should not need to have the Sun firmware in your drivers, just upload them to the card and array from Solaris and they will stay there in nvram. Not true if you boot from the SOC/SOCAL disks, OBP will load it's own firmware which is very slow and has tons

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:21:15 + Chris Newport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In general, you should not need to have the Sun firmware in your > drivers, just upload them to the card and array from Solaris and they > will stay there in nvram. Not true if you boot from the SOC/SOCAL disks, OBP wil

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 09:19:40AM -0800, Dennis Jenkins wrote: > Yup, I read that too. And immediately there after I > downloaded the last 2.2 kernel and tried to compile > it. Unfortunately for me, GCC 3.3.5 choked heavily on > it. I will try again when I figure out how to get > Gentoo to down

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

Dennis Jenkins wrote: The soc/pluto stuff has not been maintained since 2.2.x and AFAIK this is also true for socal. Yup, I read that too. And immediately there after I downloaded the last 2.2 kernel and tried to compile it. Unfortunately for me, GCC 3.3.5 choked heavily on it. I will try

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

--- Chris Newport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have no idea about Gentoo versions, but Splack 8.0 > has a working 2.2 > kernel with soc and socal modules. Everything you > need to experiment > with 2.4 is there, but the toolset and compiler are > too old for 2.6 > In general, you should not n

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

Thank you for your response! Details below. ps- I'm at work. My box is at home. The details given below are from memory. My box specs: 8 processor E3500 (336MHz), 10G ram, 8x 18.2G fiber channel drives in the 3500 chassis, and an external A3500 raid array with 35x 9.1G scsi disks. Linux can se

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

Dennis Jenkins wrote: Does this mean that I will be able to successfully compile a 2.6 kernel using gcc 3.3.5 on my sparc64 gentoo box? Yeah! now.. If only I (or someone) could fix the fcal/socal driver. I even tried using the socal_asm.h firmware patch derived from the Solaris 10 "socal" firmwar

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

Does this mean that I will be able to successfully compile a 2.6 kernel using gcc 3.3.5 on my sparc64 gentoo box? Yeah! now.. If only I (or someone) could fix the fcal/socal driver. I even tried using the socal_asm.h firmware patch derived from the Solaris 10 "socal" firmware. No luck. :( ---

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 01:44:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Thanks. Many of these fixups are due to a 64-bit-resource patch in Greg's > bk-pci tree which he has now reverted. That being said: > - That patch will come back sometime > - Fixes like the below make sense anyway and can be merged

Re: [PATCH] sparc: fix compile failure ("struct resource" related)

Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thanks. Many of these fixups are due to a 64-bit-resource patch in Greg's bk-pci tree which he has now reverted. That being said: - That patch will come back sometime - Fixes like the below make s