On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 10:32:06AM +0200, Ole-Egil Hvitmyren wrote: > Sven Luther wrote: > >On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 11:14:28PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > > > >>On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Ole-Egil Hvitmyren wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Since I'm no kernel hacker I'm not the guy to bug about this. Like I > >>>said, I can help with patches to kernel-package and amiga-fdisk. Kernel > >>>is not my field. I know MAI themselves were working on porting the 2.6 > >>>kernel, but I haven't heard a single word from them for almost a year. > >>> > >> > >>Supposedly, it was two or three months from being sent to private > >>testers in January, but we both know about the personnel changes since > >>then. The 2.4 port still has issues with DMA which make it unready for > >>mainstream. > > > > > ><troll mode> > >huh, and i thought it was the hardware who had a DMA problem. > ></troll mode> > > > >Sorry, couldn't resist :), no offense intented, i think this whole issue > >is more of a painfull mess, but let's not talk about this here. > > I don't see ANY damn reason why you need to drag that debate in here, > but let's just say certain other OSes doesn't have a problem marking DMA > buffers as non-cacheable.
Well, that is hardly any proof that there is no problem, just that the other OSes (with an S) somehow work around the problem. My pegasos 1 has uptime of months, and is serving both to download my mail and as my wife's primary workstation, running X and and gnome and other such stuff. But then, it uses the hardware workaround and didn't need any above tricks that i know of. > It's stated pretty explicitly in the northbridge documentation that this > is how it needs to work, saying the hardware is buggy because it follows > its own documentation seems a TAD silly to me. Well, it doesn't say so in the doc i have, so ... > But you can't help it, can you? Every time someone mentions the AmigaOne > it has to be "not very stable the time (two years ago, was it?) I saw Well, it was in October, but as said, i believe it may have been because a bad board, or something such, since i know other people (like you) are running linux just fine on it. > it" and so on. Yes, we've had some Linux problems. Quite a few, > actually. But most of that seems to come from MAI and Eyetech wanting to > get everything for free, and not doing anything to actively support the > development of the Linux kernel. Well, that may be one reason, but i guess it is not the only one. > Yes, I know at least some things about the personell changes since then. > But I didn't know they lost their entire kernel development division ;-) I didn' even know that, nor do i care. , so sorry for the disgression, and back to serious things ... > And about the amiga-fdisk patch. I'll send it soon enough. But since it > doesn't affect classic Amiga how is it to be verified? And considering > your own bug report is now 255 days old (and counting), what good do you > suppose it will do? I did have a discussion with cts some time in > October, but he couldn't test it then, so... Well, that build is an example of what you should not do. I fixed this in oldenbourg in october, but somehow forgot to send in the patch, and later lost my disk and was not worried, thinking it was ok, that amiga-fdisk has it already patched. But then, parted is the important one, so ... > And technically I shouldn't be the one to file the bug-report, since I > don't even have OS4 running myself, yet. Hopefully I'll have a CD within > a few days. It would be nice to get it properly tested. Therein lies your error. If you don't do it, who will, probably nobody. > About parted: > I can take a quick look. The patch should be fairly trivial (just one > more type of block to avoid deleting, and one pointer in the RDSK that > needs to be updated if the RDB is to be restructured). I attached the If it is just the boot list thing, i added those, after discussion with you or/and some other guy, if i rememebr well. I never had feedback on if it workeed though. > patch I made to this email so you can also compare to what you did in Ok, i will have a look. > parted. While I was at it I did put in some more work on amiga-fdisk, > but maybe parted is a better place to spend time. At the very least Yep, since debian-installer use libparted, and miga-fdisk is no more on the initrd, i believe. > amiga-fdisk should be compiled for more than m68k and ppc (I see an old > outstanding on that one. I myself use it with the emulator "Amithlon" on > my triple-boot PC here in the office from time to time), and it should > be compilable with GCC 3.3. It is, i sent at least that fix, and i also remember using it without problem on my athlon box. In fact my initial pegasos linux iinstall used amiga-fdisk on my x86 to partition an old scsi disk i had around, copy the kernel on it, move it to the pegasos, and try running it. no tftp booting at that time, like we have now. That made that i was the first one (and maybe the only one) bit by the bug in amiga-fdisk whichused a 16bit half-word to store the sector size when calculating the cyl/head/block size. And this almost 5 year after the last upstream release. I guess nobody used amiga-fdisk to create a fully blank partition table, so it never happened. And the authors, Roman or Geert i think, mostly tested on older small disk where this was no problem. Friendly, Sven Luther