Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-29 Thread Terry Lambert

David O'Brien wrote:
 Yes, but the proper approach would be:

[ ... ]

 What we got:
 
 I've developed the proc splitting on i386 and it works for me.
 The diffs are at http://___.  AXP hackers, go to it.


That's a heck of a lot more than the Alpha people normally
get!  Generally , it's cvs commit log: break alpha.

In any case, Peter Fixed it... Yeah, Peter!

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-28 Thread Terry Lambert

John Baldwin wrote:
  halted CPU 0
 
  halt code = 2
  kernel stack not valid halt
  PC = fc553020
 
 You overflowed your kernel stack.  You can use srm to dump the
 memory at that address (I can't remember the stupid SRM syntax
 for the life of me though) and wade through it looking for
 kernel-text addresses to figure out the stack trace.

From my reading of the x86 source, one of the things Julian did
was seperate out the allocation of stack pages, using a defined
value.

This may be as simple as putting a larger number in your config
file... I don't know what the Alpha default was before the change,
but I do know that it runs 8K pages, which if KPAGES is in 4K
chunks, might have reduced your stack size on you...

Not brilliant, but something to try...

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-28 Thread Peter Wemm

Terry Lambert wrote:
 John Baldwin wrote:
   halted CPU 0
  
   halt code = 2
   kernel stack not valid halt
   PC = fc553020
  
  You overflowed your kernel stack.  You can use srm to dump the
  memory at that address (I can't remember the stupid SRM syntax
  for the life of me though) and wade through it looking for
  kernel-text addresses to figure out the stack trace.
 
 From my reading of the x86 source, one of the things Julian did
 was seperate out the allocation of stack pages, using a defined
 value.
 
 This may be as simple as putting a larger number in your config
 file... I don't know what the Alpha default was before the change,
 but I do know that it runs 8K pages, which if KPAGES is in 4K
 chunks, might have reduced your stack size on you...
 
 Not brilliant, but something to try...
 
 -- Terry

Actually, this was the result of not correctly setting up the
new argument to the fork trampoline code.

We now have a fully viable Alpha + KSE kernel as of about
5 minutes ago:

[3:19am]~/ffp4-102 p4 describe -du 1155
Change 1155 by peter@peter_up2000 on 2001/08/28 03:12:57

Really solve the alpha KSE problem.  This was submitted from
an alpha running the KSE kernel in multiuser mode!

Affected files ...

... //depot/projects/kse/sys/alpha/alpha/vm_machdep.c#5 edit

Differences ...

 //depot/projects/kse/sys/alpha/alpha/vm_machdep.c#5 (text+ko) 

@@ -210,7 +210,7 @@
(u_int64_t)fork_return; /* s0: a0 */
td2-td_pcb-pcb_context[1] =
(u_int64_t)exception_return;/* s1: ra */
-   td2-td_pcb-pcb_context[2] = (u_long) p2;  /* s2: a1 */
+   td2-td_pcb-pcb_context[2] = (u_long)td2;  /* s2: a1 */
td2-td_pcb-pcb_context[7] =
(u_int64_t)fork_trampoline; /* ra: assembly magic */
 #ifdef SMP

fork_trampoline() changed from a 'struct proc *p' to 'struct thread *td'
argument and got missed here.

The box is now running quite happily..  All that remains is to get the rest
of the alpha kernel to compile, not just the subset that I actually use. :)

And then comes tidying up the loose ends. :-]

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-28 Thread Andrew Gallatin


Peter Wemm writes:
  
  Actually, this was the result of not correctly setting up the
  new argument to the fork trampoline code.
  
  We now have a fully viable Alpha + KSE kernel as of about
  5 minutes ago:

Excellent.  Thank you, Peter.

Drew

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-28 Thread David O'Brien

On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 11:04:39PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
 It has been pointed out that the stumbling block is ~10 lines
 of Akpha assembly language code that Julian is asking that
 someone familiar with the Alpha write.
 
 Julian is not an Alpha assembly language guru.  In order to
 make these changes, he would have to do a lot of work, whereas
 someone who knew Alpha assembly language could do them very
 quickly.

Yes, but the proper approach would be:

Dear Alpha guys,

I've compiled all the C code on the Alpha, but I know the xyz.S file
needs changing.  I don't know AXP asm to save my life, but here is
the diff I had to do in the i386 xyz.S file:

[ diff ]

What this change does (for those AXP asm hackers that don't read
Intel) is __.   What would be the AXP change needed?


What we got:

I've developed the proc splitting on i386 and it works for me.
The diffs are at http://___.  AXP hackers, go to it.


 I think asking him to do this without knowledge of register
 save/restore and allocation plocies of the FreeBSD Alpha port
 is rather unfair.

That is fine, but the -current AXP developers are a small lot.  They need
to have up-front leg work done, so the limited time they do have (where
many i386-only people are tugging at their sleeves) is well spent.
 
-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread Andrew Gallatin


Julian Elischer writes:
  
  Can the IA64 and Alpha developers (Arm too?)
  look at the KSE patch set at
  http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/thediff
  
  This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386.
  it needs people who understand the other architectures to make
  the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4)
  so that when this is checked into -current their architectures are
  not broken. (On teh other hand if they would rather fix up the breakage
  afterwards (which may be easier) then they should let me know
  so I can get on with committing it.
  Matt and I want to commit it  ASAP, so we can get on with
  actual threading support. Peter has also indicated that he thinks that
  it should be done soon, so I need toknow if there will 
  be forthcoming changes for the other architectures,
  or I should go ahead and commit...

Please, please don't intentionally break other architectures.  Esp
ones that actually work, like alpha.

Its basically just mechanical changes up until this point, right?
You've carved up the proc struct  ranamed some things, right?

I'd really appreciate it if you could make the mechanical changes
required to get it to the point where it at least compiles on alpha
using beast.freebsd.org. At that point, the people on -alpha should be
willing to test your patch and help fix any problems that come up.

Thanks,

Drew

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread Julian Elischer

The mecanincal changes in C code are pretty simple,
but you really need a running machine to do them because
you need to change-compile-change-compile-change-compile  (etc.)

It took me about 1 day to do the i386 specific things..
Having doen that is should take someone with a running alpha
abut a half day to do the alpha version (now that I've
done the 386) and someone with a clue 
about alpha assembler needs to make the same changes to the 
machine code. (it was probably about 10 lines of assembler changes).

The bigest part is the re-arranging of the u-area and changing the
code to follow that change.


On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Andrew Gallatin wrote:

 
 Julian Elischer writes:
   
   Can the IA64 and Alpha developers (Arm too?)
   look at the KSE patch set at
   http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/thediff
   
   This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386.
   it needs people who understand the other architectures to make
   the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4)
   so that when this is checked into -current their architectures are
   not broken. (On teh other hand if they would rather fix up the breakage
   afterwards (which may be easier) then they should let me know
   so I can get on with committing it.
   Matt and I want to commit it  ASAP, so we can get on with
   actual threading support. Peter has also indicated that he thinks that
   it should be done soon, so I need toknow if there will 
   be forthcoming changes for the other architectures,
   or I should go ahead and commit...
 
 Please, please don't intentionally break other architectures.  Esp
 ones that actually work, like alpha.
 
 Its basically just mechanical changes up until this point, right?
 You've carved up the proc struct  ranamed some things, right?
 
 I'd really appreciate it if you could make the mechanical changes
 required to get it to the point where it at least compiles on alpha
 using beast.freebsd.org. At that point, the people on -alpha should be
 willing to test your patch and help fix any problems that come up.
 

I REALLY want to have alpha (and hopefully other) ready to do at the same
time.

but at the same time, I'm 'carrying this' because as long as I'm not
committed I have a daily merge job. And it's getting bigger
as people change low level code in way s that may not be compatible 
with what I need.

I would be happy if I could commit it in 2 weeks. I'd like some help from
the other architecture people though.
I've done 1.85 MB of patches and the machine dependednt parts are probably 
about 15K of that. 


 Thanks,
 
 Drew
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread David O'Brien

On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 10:44:04PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
 This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386.
 it needs people who understand the other architectures to make
 the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4)

Have you even tried compiling this on beast.freebsd.org?  You didn't say.

Unfortuneatly the burdon is on you to make this work on the Alpha
platform before you commit it.

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread Julian Elischer

Actualy peter is most of the way through the alpha support as we speak.
I wouldn't know what the alpha looks like from a architecture pov
if it came and kicked me..
I did some small parts already but peter just checked in more in P4.


On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, David O'Brien wrote:

 On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 10:44:04PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
  This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386.
  it needs people who understand the other architectures to make
  the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4)
 
 Have you even tried compiling this on beast.freebsd.org?  You didn't say.
 
 Unfortuneatly the burdon is on you to make this work on the Alpha
 platform before you commit it.
 
 -- 
 -- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread Peter Wemm

Julian Elischer wrote:
 Actualy peter is most of the way through the alpha support as we speak.
 I wouldn't know what the alpha looks like from a architecture pov
 if it came and kicked me..
 I did some small parts already but peter just checked in more in P4.


Latest news:  The alpha made it to single user... (!).  There is still
a problem, but I will find that shortly.

I have not yet built GENERIC, just my tuned kernel.  Things like linux and
osf1 compat still need doing.


FWIW, the tail:
...
Timecounter i8254  frequency 1193182 Hz
ata0-slave: ata_command: timeout waiting for intr
ata0-slave: identify failed
acd0: CDROM CD-540E at ata0-master PIO4
Waiting 2 seconds for SCSI devices to settle
da0 at ahc0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
da0: SEAGATE ST318404LW 0006 Fixed Direct Access SCSI-3 device 
da0: 80.000MB/s transfers (40.000MHz, offset 63, 16bit), Tagged Queueing Enabled
da0: 17501MB (35843670 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 2231C)
da1 at ahc0 bus 0 target 1 lun 0
da1: IBM DMVS18V 0250 Fixed Direct Access SCSI-3 device 
da1: 80.000MB/s transfers (40.000MHz, offset 31, 16bit), Tagged Queueing Enabled
da1: 17501MB (35843670 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 2231C)
Mounting root from ufs:/dev/da0a
Enter full pathname of shell or RETURN for /bin/sh: 
# ls

halted CPU 0

halt code = 2
kernel stack not valid halt
PC = fc553020

CPU 0 booting
...

oops :-)

 On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
 
  On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 10:44:04PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
   This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386.
   it needs people who understand the other architectures to make
   the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4)
  
  Have you even tried compiling this on beast.freebsd.org?  You didn't say.
  
  Unfortuneatly the burdon is on you to make this work on the Alpha
  platform before you commit it.
  
  -- 
  -- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  
 
 
 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
 
 

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread Terry Lambert

Andrew Gallatin wrote:
 I'd really appreciate it if you could make the mechanical changes
 required to get it to the point where it at least compiles on alpha
 using beast.freebsd.org. At that point, the people on -alpha should be
 willing to test your patch and help fix any problems that come up.

It has been pointed out that the stumbling block is ~10 lines
of Akpha assembly language code that Julian is asking that
someone familiar with the Alpha write.

Julian is not an Alpha assembly language guru.  In order to
make these changes, he would have to do a lot of work, whereas
someone who knew Alpha assembly language could do them very
quickly.

I think asking him to do this without knowledge of register
save/restore and allocation plocies of the FreeBSD Alpha port
is rather unfair.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-27 Thread John Baldwin


On 28-Aug-01 Peter Wemm wrote:
 Julian Elischer wrote:
 Actualy peter is most of the way through the alpha support as we speak.
 I wouldn't know what the alpha looks like from a architecture pov
 if it came and kicked me..
 I did some small parts already but peter just checked in more in P4.
 
 
 Latest news:  The alpha made it to single user... (!).  There is still
 a problem, but I will find that shortly.
 
 I have not yet built GENERIC, just my tuned kernel.  Things like linux and
 osf1 compat still need doing.
 
 
 FWIW, the tail:
 ...
 Timecounter i8254  frequency 1193182 Hz
 ata0-slave: ata_command: timeout waiting for intr
 ata0-slave: identify failed
 acd0: CDROM CD-540E at ata0-master PIO4
 Waiting 2 seconds for SCSI devices to settle
 da0 at ahc0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
 da0: SEAGATE ST318404LW 0006 Fixed Direct Access SCSI-3 device 
 da0: 80.000MB/s transfers (40.000MHz, offset 63, 16bit), Tagged Queueing
 Enabled
 da0: 17501MB (35843670 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 2231C)
 da1 at ahc0 bus 0 target 1 lun 0
 da1: IBM DMVS18V 0250 Fixed Direct Access SCSI-3 device 
 da1: 80.000MB/s transfers (40.000MHz, offset 31, 16bit), Tagged Queueing
 Enabled
 da1: 17501MB (35843670 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 2231C)
 Mounting root from ufs:/dev/da0a
 Enter full pathname of shell or RETURN for /bin/sh: 
# ls
 
 halted CPU 0
 
 halt code = 2
 kernel stack not valid halt
 PC = fc553020

You overflowed your kernel stack.  You can use srm to dump the memory at that
address (I can't remember the stupid SRM syntax for the life of me though) and
wade through it looking for kernel-text addresses to figure out the stack trace.

-- 

John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc
Power Users Use the Power to Serve!  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-26 Thread Julian Elischer


Can the IA64 and Alpha developers (Arm too?)
look at the KSE patch set at
http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/thediff

This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386.
it needs people who understand the other architectures to make
the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4)
so that when this is checked into -current their architectures are
not broken. (On teh other hand if they would rather fix up the breakage
afterwards (which may be easier) then they should let me know
so I can get on with committing it.
Matt and I want to commit it  ASAP, so we can get on with
actual threading support. Peter has also indicated that he thinks that
it should be done soon, so I need toknow if there will 
be forthcoming changes for the other architectures,
or I should go ahead and commit...





-- 
++   __ _  __
|   __--_|\  Julian Elischer |   \ U \/ / hard at work in 
|  /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--x   USA\ a very strange
| (   OZ)\___   ___ | country !
+- X_.---._/presently in San Francisco   \_/   \\
  v

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message