Linux-Development-Sys Digest #93, Volume #7 Mon, 23 Aug 99 16:14:18 EDT
Contents:
Re: Token Ring PCI ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux - Memory model / protection scheme (Ulrich Weigand)
Re: "current" while DMA (Yung-Hsiang Lu)
Re: Shared Libraries: what is the linux equivalent of "dllimport" and "dllexport"
(Jonas Utterstrom)
Re: Calling a BIOS interrupt (Gregory Hayrapetian)
Reverse engineer of serial protocol or Ericsson SH888 (Nigel Tamplin)
Re: Netgear FA310TX (Dave Platt)
Re: Writing to boot sector (H. Peter Anvin)
need a _good_ kernel ftp site (Phil Howard)
statistics history (Rolf Fokkens)
Re: Autoscan, Autoconf, and Automake - HOWTO? (Stephen Torri)
Re: Shared Libraries: what is the linux equivalent of "dllimport" and "dllexport"
(Josh Stern)
Re: Shared Libraries: what is the linux equivalent of "dllimport" and "dllexport"
("Noam K")
Re: Netgear FA310TX (Rich Carreiro)
Re: How can I make device driver module to support many version of kernel? (Eric
Hegstrom)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS ("Christopher R. Thompson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Token Ring PCI
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:48:24 GMT
Done.
The olympic driver (all pci except LanStreamer) is now included in the
latest 2.2.11 and 2.3.x kernels. If you want to patch and earlier 2.2.x
kernel check out the web site.
Mike
http://www.linuxtr.net
Linux Token Ring Project
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ulrich Weigand)
Subject: Re: Linux - Memory model / protection scheme
Date: 23 Aug 1999 17:51:01 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Kaiser) writes:
>(Being ignorant of the intel architecture, but knowing a few others
>quite well,) I would expect that that the CPU has some register that
>points to the page directory; on a task swich, you only change that
>register (and possibly flush the TLB).
Well, on Linux a MM context switch does indeed imply a reloading
of the PDBR (page directory base register). (Even with the recent
changes in Linux 2.3.x, the MM context switch is only sometimes
*delayed*, but when it happens, it still reloads the PDBR ...)
On Win95, however, the the PDBR points always to the same page directory;
on a task switch, that part of the page directory that corresponds to the
non-shared address space is overwritten with pointers to the page tables
of the new address space. The page tables themselves are not changed, of
course. So you basically have to copy at most 2KB (half the page directory
size).
This has the advantage that you save some space that would otherwise
be occupied by the full page directories of the various address spaces;
plus you might have the advantage that you don't need to perform a
global TLB flush, but can keep the TLB entries pointing to the shared
address range alive ... On the other hand, you do have the overhead
of copying those 2KB.
--
Ulrich Weigand,
IMMD 1, Universitaet Erlangen-Nuernberg,
Martensstr. 3, D-91058 Erlangen, Phone: +49 9131 85-7688
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yung-Hsiang Lu)
Subject: Re: "current" while DMA
Date: 23 Aug 1999 16:05:06 GMT
I don't understand this. Why is it hard to find the process that
generates an IO? Shouldn't it be "current" when the kernel enters the
device driver? The kernel must know which process requests the IO,
right?
Peter Samuelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
:
: It's pretty much impossible to automatically pinpoint a particular
: process responsible for a particular run of I/O (including DMA). The
: problem is that file I/O and network I/O are both buffered.
:
: --
: Peter Samuelson
: <sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
--
Sincerely,
Yung-Hsiang Lu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jonas Utterstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Shared Libraries: what is the linux equivalent of "dllimport" and
"dllexport"
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 16:13:16 GMT
In article <Va8w3.541$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Stern) wrote:
> Jonas Utterstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Stern) wrote:
>
> There is something missing here. I can't figure out if it
> is a breakdown in logic, English comprehension, or basic
> understanding of what a shared library is. So let's review:
>
> On Linux, with Communicator 4.6, we have the *executable* size, which
> *does not* include the shared libraries that it dynamically links
> with, coming in at approximately 14 MB. This is big, but it is
> *not* measuring the size of any shared libraries. If you want to
> see which shared libraries it links with you look at the output
> of the command ldd `which netscape`. There you see a bunch of
> different libs that do different things, but these libraries
> are not distributed with netscape. They perform various other
> collections of functions having nothing to do with Netscape,
> so their size is irrelevant to the discussion. So the first
> question for you to answer is "What size are you talking about?"
> and the second question is "If this size is different on
> Linux and Windows, how can it be attributed to a difference
> between C and C++ dynamic library sizes?" The second question
> completely baffles me, not only because the first hasn't
> been answered, but also because you haven't described any
> reason to believe that different percentages of C and C++
> are used in the Linux and Windows versions. So my response
> is not about defending C++ - the point is rather that you
> are simply not making any sense. Whatever you seem to
> be claiming is not only not correct, it's not even
> incorrect! There is some kind of failure in the presuppositions
> of your whole analysis.
>
First off all, could you please keep the insults out? It only makes you
look stupid.
No, I was not talking about Communicator 4.6, I was talking about
Mozilla (www.mozilla.org). Talking about Communicator is a non-issue
since they solved the shared library problem with static linking there.
Only a fractional part of Mozilla is platform specific code, so it is
quite easy to compare the sizes of dlls and Linux shared libraries. If
you had bothered to follow the link I gave in the other thread, this
would have been a non-issue.
/Jonas U
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Gregory Hayrapetian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Calling a BIOS interrupt
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 18:28:46 +0200
Chris Butler wrote:
> [comp.os.linux.development.system - Fri, 20 Aug 1999 01:38:05 GMT]
> * Bartosz wrote *
>
> > Chris Butler wrote:
> >> It gets all the information it needs from the BIOS at boot time (eg, HD
> >> information, etc), before switching to protected mode.
> > Are you sure about that HD information? I think the kernel ignores what
> > BIOS says about HD. I once used to change disk drives without setting
> > BIOS appropriately, and Linux somehow identified disk geometry etc.
>
> OK. Instead of basing my messages on vague recollections of what I thought
> I'd heard on linux-kernel a while back, I UTSL. :-)
>
> It seems, from arch/i386/boot/setup.S, that it gets the following from the
> BIOS at boot time: (from the comments)
>
> * memory size
> * hd0 data
> * hd1 data (including whether there is a hd1 or not)
> * existance of a MCA bus
> * " " " PS/2 mouse
>
Detecting the memory size with BIOS could be a problem.
Some BIOS returns only a 16-bit value of the installed RAM.
So that the max size of RAM detection is only 64MB.
I thinks it�s better when you detect the memory size after
protected mode and MMU initializing. You simply test in
4MB steps the RAM.
With this method you can detect up to 4GB of RAM
without BIOS.
> (if CONFIG_APM is defined)
> * " " " APM BIOS
> * the entry point, etc, for calling APM functions from 32-bit mode
>
> After this lot, it goes into protected mode.
>
> So, it looks like it _does_ get HD info from the BIOS. Although it DOES
> also probe the IDE bus directly when the IDE driver initialises. The
> reason for doing it both ways can probably be explained by a kernel
> hacker :-)
>
> --
> Chris Butler
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Nigel Tamplin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Reverse engineer of serial protocol or Ericsson SH888
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 17:27:08 +0000
Hi,
Some months ago I came across a discussion where someone was capturing
the
serial data between a Windows machine and the scanner so that they could
reverse engineer the protocol.
I would like to know how this is done.
My reason is not for a scanner but for an Ericson SH888 mobile phone
(with built in modem) connected via the serial port, I can access the
modem via programs like kermit or minicom but unless the phone has been
Win95 initialised it will refuse to do any data calls.
Thanks,
Nigel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Platt)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.hardware,linux.dev.net
Subject: Re: Netgear FA310TX
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 18:25:06 GMT
>>Is there a driver for FA310TX (10/100 PCI card) in existence or
>development?
>
>Robert,
>The Netgear FA310TX uses the DEC 21143 chip...which uses the 'Tulip' series
>of ethernet drivers. Just about every Linux distribution has the 'Tulip'
>driver...but it is constantly being updated...so you may want to find the
>latest.
I've seen at least two different versions of the FA310TX.
The original version used the DEC 21140 chip. I've bought, and used,
a bunch of these over the years, with very good results. The
"tulip.c" driver in the kernel works well, although you may want to
update to the latest version.
Starting about a year ago, Netgear switched over to an FA310TX design
which uses an OEM'ed Lite-On PNIC chip with a Netgear part number.
Although the PNIC is supposed to be Tulip-compatible, and it _mostly_
works with the Tulip driver, there are some definite problems.
The biggest problem of which I'm aware, appears to be due to a bug in
some versions of the PNIC chip. Under conditions of heavy load - and
especially if collisions are occurring - the chip's receiver logic
gets confused, and dumps a whole bunch of gibberish into memory. The
Tulip driver does not deal gracefully with this situation, and tends
to cease receiving anything at all from the card. It's necessary to
restart the card (ifconfig down, ifconfig up, reestablish routes) to
get it working again.
I've also read reports of the PNIC-based FA310TX failing to receive
ARP responses immediately after transmitting an ARP. Looks like a
race condition of some sort.
I cannot recommend buying the PNIC-based version of the FA310TX due to
these problems, and to Netgear's failure to respond adequately to
reports of these problems.
If Netgear has switched their production to the 21143, that would be a
Good Think (in my opinion) and I'd love to see and test one of these
cards.
--
Dave Platt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior/
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (H. Peter Anvin)
Subject: Re: Writing to boot sector
Date: 23 Aug 1999 18:30:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (H. Peter Anvin)
Followup to: <0l_v3.1557$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author: "Benjamin S. Vera-Tudela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: comp.os.linux.development.system
>
> Hi all. .... I am new to this newsgroup, some please welcome me!!! :)
>
> I have a question: I have never written device drivers and other cool stuff
> under linux. I run RH 5.2 and will like to write to the boot sector of a
> floppy some stuff (e.g. a buffer of data). I have opened /dev/fd0 using the
> open system call but I dont know how to write to the boot sector of the
> floppy. I though I could use the write system call, or ioctl (which I have
> never played with) so I need some help. Anybody???
>
> Thanks
>
write() will do peachily.
-hpa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at work, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in private!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Howard)
Subject: need a _good_ kernel ftp site
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 18:34:52 GMT
The problems:
1. ftp.kernel.org is basically not accessible anymore
2. ftp.XX.kernel.org hands off to a random mirror, and the mirrors
are all inconsistent with each other. Since I use a mirroring
program, it would end up downloading the whole site every time.
3. Some ftp.XX.kernel.org sites are out of date, mangled, or just
plain empty. There is no quality verification of ftp.XX.kernel.org
sites.
So it seems that the obvious solution is to extract specific site names
from the ftp.XX.kernel.org list (e.g. the DNS provided IP addresses)
and simply use the same site every time. Due to #3, I would need to
figure out which site is actually reliable and stable. Does anyone
know which ones are? If YOU run one of the mirror sites, is YOUR site
consistent, reliable and stable?
--
Phil Howard KA9WGN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Rolf Fokkens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: statistics history
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 20:24:32 +0200
SGkhDQoNCkknZCBsaWtlIHRvIGhhdmUgc29tZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBvbiBMaW51eCBzZXJ2
ZXIgcGVyZm9ybWFuY2UsIG92ZXIgdGhlDQpsYXN0IC4ubGV0J3Mgc2F5Li4gbW9udGguIEkn
ZCBsaWtlIHRvIHNlZSBzb21lIHN0YXRpc3RpY3MgbGlrZSBwYWdpbmcsDQpWTSB1c2FnZSwg
Q1BVIGxvYWQgZXRjLg0KDQpBbnkga25vdyB0b29scyB0byB0YWtlIGNhcmUgb2YgdGhpcz8N
Cg0KUm9sZg0K
------------------------------
From: Stephen Torri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Autoscan, Autoconf, and Automake - HOWTO?
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:21:10 -0400
I'm trying to learn how to develop programs under linux. So I decided
that I should try to learn how to use autoscan, autoconf and automake.
So that is the reason why I'm trying this way. I new to Makefiles and
all other stuff so some help would be appreciated. Can you send me an
example?
Stephen
Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Stephen Torri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> > I have some .cpp files I got off the web. I thought I would create a
> > Makefile. There are only three files so I thought it would be an easy
> > start for a novice. Is there a HOWTO or a website which talks about
> > how to use these programs to create the configure and Makefile?
>
> Ummm, the info documentation that comes with GNU make? (For three C++
> files I suspect you don't really need a full-blown autoconf setup.
> Just write the Makefile by hand.)
>
> --
> Peter Samuelson
> <sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Shared Libraries: what is the linux equivalent of "dllimport" and
"dllexport"
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Stern)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 19:26:26 GMT
Jonas Utterstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh Stern) wrote:
>First off all, could you please keep the insults out? It only makes you
>look stupid.
Sorry if you felt insulted. I still think there is a lot of information
or misunderstanding in what you posted and the latest post only
clears up a part of it.
>No, I was not talking about Communicator 4.6, I was talking about
>Mozilla (www.mozilla.org). Talking about Communicator is a non-issue
>since they solved the shared library problem with static linking there.
Communicator 4.6 does link to a lot of shared libraries.
But anyway, this clarification helps partly.
Now where does the contrast between shared
libraries based on C and C++ come into it?? Could you post the
sizes of the libraries that you think represent the same code
on Linux and on Windows and say what percentage C and C++ you
estimate them to be? Also, do the Windows versions support
exceptions, and if not, are exceptions turned off on the Linux
versions?
-Josh
------------------------------
From: "Noam K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Shared Libraries: what is the linux equivalent of "dllimport" and
"dllexport"
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 21:45:53 +0300
Ulrich Weigand wrote in message
<7ppc7p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaz Kylheku) writes:
>
>>Because libraries sometimes grow sophisticated enoguh that they have to be
>>broken into multiple translation units. Yet these modules have to
communicate
>>with each other. These communication pathways are intended to be private
to the
>>library, yet they are visible due to the unavoidable of identifiers with
>>external linkage.
>
>>These ``private externals'' pollute the namespace of the library user.
>>What's worse, the library user can override these symbols!
>
>Provided you use binutils version 2.9.1 or later, there is a way around
>this: you can 'localize' symbols using the objcopy -L flag, which means
>the symbol is treated from now on as if it were local (had been declared
>'static' in C).
>
>So, you link all your library objects together into one big .o file
>(using ld -r or so), apply objcopy -L to localize all symbols you
>don't want to export, and then create the shared object from the
>resulting .o file ...
>
>While this is somewhat convoluted, it should work :-/
>
>--
> Ulrich Weigand,
> IMMD 1, Universitaet Erlangen-Nuernberg,
> Martensstr. 3, D-91058 Erlangen, Phone: +49 9131 85-7688
Thanks Ulrich, this solution works great!
Noam
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.hardware,linux.dev.net
Subject: Re: Netgear FA310TX
From: Rich Carreiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 23 Aug 1999 15:43:04 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Platt) writes:
> The original version used the DEC 21140 chip. I've bought, and used,
> a bunch of these over the years, with very good results. The
> "tulip.c" driver in the kernel works well, although you may want to
> update to the latest version.
>
> Starting about a year ago, Netgear switched over to an FA310TX design
> which uses an OEM'ed Lite-On PNIC chip with a Netgear part number.
> Although the PNIC is supposed to be Tulip-compatible, and it _mostly_
> works with the Tulip driver, there are some definite problems.
Have you tried using the "patched" Tulip driver that Netgear/BayNetworks
provides on their current driver disks (and is avail on their website)?
--
Rich Carreiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I've come to the conclusion that there should be a tort for wasting my
time because you're an idiot." -- Stephen T. Middlebrook
------------------------------
From: Eric Hegstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can I make device driver module to support many version of kernel?
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:52:27 -0700
Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> The only people seriously inconvenienced are those who would
> distribute closed-source drivers.
>
Well it can be pain even if you have the source code really.
--
Eric Hegstrom .~.
Senior Software Engineer /V\
Sonoran Scanners, Inc. // \\ L I N U X
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /( )\ >don't fear the penguin<
520-617-0072 x402 ^^-^^
------------------------------
From: "Christopher R. Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:51:18 -0700
I think TAO is way to ancient of a philosophy to be allowed into modern
society and computers. But "TAO" is ok. After you've got the the thing
up and running we will change the name to "Vladimir" to reflect a more
modern philosophy.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
