Responses in-line. On 6/5/25 12:10, Daniel Maslowski via 9fans wrote: > Moody, first of all, I apologize. To be clear, I would not wamt to claim > anyone else's work as mine, especially not right in front of them. Quite the > opposite; I credit others on a regular basis. All I'm trying here is to help > bring things further. > I do recall that you had mentioned a patch for something on IRC, but I had > forgotten about it and not taken a closer look, focusing on the fiddling we > did that evening; sorry if it was exactly this for r2. I have no logs, > otherwise I'd check.
Thank you for the apology. For full transparency, this is the irc log snippet that has the conversation regarding this: 250525:2056 CyReVolt ⇒ Is there a way to get something like an objdump so that we can look at the whole kernel? 250525:2058 CyReVolt ⇒ We cannot even stepi or hit a breakpoint anymore with a static ... 250525:2059 moodman ⇒ radare2 has support for plan 9 binaries 250525:2059 moodman ⇒ and can connect to a remote gdb 250525:2059 moodman ⇒ I have a patch for working riscv support 250525:2059 moodman ⇒ if that helps 250525:2100 CyReVolt ⇒ working riscv support in r2? 250525:2101 moodman ⇒ for specifically plan9 binaries 250525:2103 CyReVolt ⇒ ah so r2 riscv support 250525:2103 CyReVolt ⇒ Where's that patch? =) 250525:2105 moodman ⇒ http://okturing.com/src/25279/body 250525:2113 CyReVolt ⇒ okay we managed to print a static char[] using uartputs for once 250525:2114 CyReVolt ⇒ i.e. static char foo[] = "12345"; uartputs(foo, 5); WORKS 250525:2114 CyReVolt ⇒ BUT uartputs("Plan 9", 6); does NOT work 250525:2115 CyReVolt ⇒ sounds like dinner time (that okturing link is still live, if anyone wants to see what the original patch was) > The changes I made were my own, in the context of yesterday's exchange with > pancake, https://mastodon.social/@CyReVolt/114625651395826989 > <https://mastodon.social/@CyReVolt/114625651395826989> - being trivial enough > that you probably did very much the same, though I am not sure whether what I > did there was correct or complete. I just took a kernel that Shawn had built > and it seemed to work fine. If I had had your changes, I would not have done > this. I told you what the patch was and you explicitly asked for it. You're right that the code is trivial, I do find it plausible that two people just wound up with very similar looking code, and there are slight modifications. I don't want to make a mountain out of a mole hill, so I'm comfortable assuming good faith on your part. I still wanted to provide the log of the conversation I recall the two of us having because I had made a serious allegation and wanted to explain why I had reached my initial thoughts on the matter. Thank you for your explanation, and I hope you can see why my thoughts were what they were. > And I wouldn't have spent a whole week creating another tool, which is > obviously 100x the effort. I didn't even know what ELF really looks like > until now. > While it's not ideal either, it makes it possible to see the symbols in gdb > now, at least. > I started with x86 because I had a kernel from Ron in both a.out and ELF that > I took as a fixture, and just added 64-bit RISC-V ELF support today, which > should get some cleanups because it got pretty ugly. > > Regarding LinuxBoot, stories like yours on the Talos system are what I see as > input for improvement. Yes, I agree, the current state is not great, and a > lot of work is necessary to make it smooth. Work that has to happen outside of our ecosystem. There's not much for us to do to make the linuxboot situation less bad. ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf84d656c78bbda91-Mb1ec41504f2ab5ebd84b8b2f Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
