Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

quoted

Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

quoted

quoted

On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

  

quoted

Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?

I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to 
depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
working properly yet.
    

I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward.  Once
2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.

-- 
Tom Rini
  

Any progress?

Jocke
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded

I'm currently battling to make 2.6.10-rc1 work the same way it used do.

But something changed in slab management and the kmallocs in request_irq
called by init_IRQ fails.

hmm, I think I saw something about that in the www log for Linus kernel. It is offline so
I can't check now.

The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?

Jocke

Found the bug.

IRQ code is now common for all arches, but ppc used a special
irq_kmalloc routine, since request irq was called very early.

The generic code just calls straight kmalloc, which obviously craps out 
when too early.

Lets see what can I do to fix it...

BTW I'm curious if any embedded PPC actually works on 2.6.10...

Regards

Pantelis