On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 18:37 +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 10:36 +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > >> Philippe Gerum wrote: > >>> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 23:46 +0100, Philippe Gerum wrote: > >>>> On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 14:19 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Anyway, there is an unreleased work-in-progress patch for x86 over -rc6 > >>>>> by Philippe. I recently had the chance to test it and hack a bit on the > >>>>> SMP IO-APIC part. It seems to work fine under UP, but SMP had some > >>>>> issues that are identified, but still need to be addressed - thanks to > >>>>> genirq, now in a widely arch-independent way. > >>>>> > >>>>> Philippe, I know you are very busy, but shouldn't we make a pre-release > >>>>> available already, also to discuss further how to deal best with genirq > >>>>> on other platforms beyond x86? > >>>> Actually, the draft patch I sent you did not boot on my SMP box today, > >>>> so qemu seems to have been a bit too friendly. Knowing that, issuing a > >>>> half-baked patch would have made no sense, so I finally refrained from > >>>> doing that. Since I'm now basically in love with the genirq layer (at > >>>> least for x86) compared to the utter mess that we had to endure > >>>> previously, I've decided to tackle the issue completely, and rewrite the > >>>> I-pipe interrupt flow in order to leverage it. Will post something asap. > >>>> > >>> Ok, here we are. I've just merged 2.6.19-ipipe-1.6-00. It has been > >>> tested on a low-end classic Pentium 90Mhz, a dusty two-way Celeron > >>> 750Mhz, and on a terrible Celeron 1GHz oldish laptop. Looks ok so far, > >>> and even passed the horrid "dohell" test on the SMP box, just smiling. > >>> However, I don't have the required hw at hand to check if our friend the > >>> MSI support is not killing us once more. This said, the MSI support in > >>> 2.6.19 also conforms to the genirq specs, so there's hope. > >>> > >>> The patch is available from the Adeos download area, and I've also > >>> committed it to the SVN trunk/. > >>> > >>> Feedback welcome, > >>> > >>> PS: I have the corresponding quilt-managed patches available upon > >>> request, to the people who want to use this work as a reference for > >>> porting to other archs. > >> You mean that you have separate patches for the common and arch > >> dependent part. > > > > Mostly, yes. The patches are split by function, but this usually > > correlates with the noarch / arch-specific break down view too. > > > >> That would be nice. I'm interested! > > > > http://download.gna.org/adeos/patches/v2.6/i386/split/ > > > >> As a consequence we > >> could provide separated patches in general and prepare-kernel.sh applies > >> them in sequence. Just an idea for the future. > >> > > > > Problem is that we would have to store a set of patches for each Adeos > > version/arch combo, instead of a single one. What advantage do you see > > in breaking the Adeos patches down for prepare-kernel.sh? > > Maintenance issues for the noarch part, e.g., if you fix a bug in the > common part or add new features it's available for all arch.
I think this should be easier once we have moved to git, pulling commits is made simple (yeah, I'm late on this too...) > But I see > your point. It's a bit more complicated and there are also patch version > numbers. > > Wolfgang. -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
