Re: ELKS 0.0.81 available from ftp.ecs.soton.ac.uk
On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Alistair Riddoch wrote: > Beau Kuiper writes: > > > > On Mon, 15 Nov 1999, you wrote: > > > Stefan Pettersson writes: > > > > > > > > On 13-Nov-99 David Murn wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Stefan Pettersson wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> So we are back to the usual problem, where in the 640 kB should we put > > > > >> or own EPROM. > > > > > > > > Sorry, my fingers wasn't syncronized with my brain. What I meant was: > > > > > > > > So we are back to the usual problem, where in the 640kB..1024kB range should we > > > > put or own EPROM. > > > > > > > > > > Most of the cards I own default to putting it at segment 0xd800. > > > > > > Al > > But that isn't large enough for the kernel image (64kb) The area between > > d800-F000 is 32kb. A better choice would be probably be c800-d800 or d000-f000. > > > > If my calculations are correct 0xd8000 - 0xf is 96K. 0xd8000 - 0xe > is 32K. There should be space in this range. > > Al Ops, I am silly. That is correct. I sort of conviently forgot that e existed in hexidecimal numbers. :-) Forgetting the basics of math Beau Kuiper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ELKS NIC that will take a 64K rom
Ken Yap writes: > > >I am now stuck. I have tried a 3c509B, an SMC Ultra, and SMC 'Western > >Digital' card, and various older NICS, and none of them take more than 32K. > > > >The only remaining options are purpose build cards. > > Have you considered using a compressed ROM image like Etherboot does? With > that you could get about 48k of code+initdata. BSS is blank of coures. It > would have to run out of RAM after decompression of course. > Its a concideration, but one of the advantages of not compressing is the extra free RAM we get because the kernel code is in ROM. Al
Re: ELKS NIC that will take a 64K rom
>I am now stuck. I have tried a 3c509B, an SMC Ultra, and SMC 'Western >Digital' card, and various older NICS, and none of them take more than 32K. > >The only remaining options are purpose build cards. Have you considered using a compressed ROM image like Etherboot does? With that you could get about 48k of code+initdata. BSS is blank of coures. It would have to run out of RAM after decompression of course.
Re: ELKS NIC that will take a 64K rom
Ken Yap writes: > > >I have a 3c905 in my desktop machine which can take 64K or 128K, but it is > >not clearly documented anywhere I can find which end of the socket I am > >supposed to put the ROM, and I could not get it to work in either end when > >I tried it in both. The other problem is that this card is PCI, so wont go > >in my test machines, and the fact that I use this machine for development, > >and for my job. > > I think the 905 takes a flash PROM, not a UVEPROM. Besides it's PCI and > the boot ROM is mapped in by the PnP BIOS, so that's no good for ELKS. > Makes sense. None of the 3com docs made it clear what was going on with the socket on this card, but the website was full of offers to sell various ROMS for different networks. I am now stuck. I have tried a 3c509B, an SMC Ultra, and SMC 'Western Digital' card, and various older NICS, and none of them take more than 32K. The only remaining options are purpose build cards. Al
Re: ELKS NIC that will take a 64K rom
>I have a 3c905 in my desktop machine which can take 64K or 128K, but it is >not clearly documented anywhere I can find which end of the socket I am >supposed to put the ROM, and I could not get it to work in either end when >I tried it in both. The other problem is that this card is PCI, so wont go >in my test machines, and the fact that I use this machine for development, >and for my job. I think the 905 takes a flash PROM, not a UVEPROM. Besides it's PCI and the boot ROM is mapped in by the PnP BIOS, so that's no good for ELKS.
RE: Palm Pilot & ELKS.
: > Personally I would like to see ELKS branch out over many processors (just : > like it's big brother), and hopefully conquer the 16bit world. Could someone give a paragraph describing the Palm Pilot's CPU/memory architecture? I thought it was a 32 bit processor, not 16 bit... Greg
RE: Palm Pilot & ELKS.
> I don't think it would dilute the main ELKS tree, the more people that get > involve the better (even if they are just testers). Obviously nobody could > be forced to work on other ports, it's just that some may be interested in > trying it. > Personally I would like to see ELKS branch out over many processors (just > like it's big brother), and hopefully conquer the 16bit world. I wonder if it would be possible to get some kind of Linux working on a TI-83 graphing calculator with 32 kb's of RAM (the RAM is backed up, and used both for storage and memory). I mean, taking advance of it's ingenious BIOS. It supports Z80 assembly, automatic power-down, tons of math stuff, it has two fonts. If it would be possible to make Linux run on it... -- Thor`n
RE: Palm Pilot & ELKS.
Yes and No. So far ELKS has been '86 based because that is the most common architecture. I haven't looked at the uClinux code but assume that they have set up another (or modified) an architecture tree - so they will have drivers etc. I only suggested it because it seems like fun (I must be mad) and I'm having a very unproductive day so far I don't think it would dilute the main ELKS tree, the more people that get involve the better (even if they are just testers). Obviously nobody could be forced to work on other ports, it's just that some may be interested in trying it. Personally I would like to see ELKS branch out over many processors (just like it's big brother), and hopefully conquer the 16bit world. Simon Wood Hardware Engineer Pace Micro Technology plc Victoria Road, Saltaire, Shipley West Yorkshire, BD18 3LF Tel : +44(0)1274 532000 Fax: +44(0)1274 532029 This E-Mail and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee please notify the sender by return and delete the message. You must not disclose, forward or copy this E-mail or attachments to any third party without the prior consent of the sender. > -Original Message- > From: Berghold, Peter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 15, 1999 6:00 PM > To: 'Simon Wood'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Palm Pilot & ELKS. > > >> Is anyone in the ELKS group planing (or doing) ELKS on the Pilot? > We could > > Pardon my ignorance here, but is in the interests of the ELKS group to > branch into the Pilot? Seems to me the expertise here is in the 808x > architectures. The PalmPilot is a 68K device. Wouldn't effort in that > arena bleach out the excellent work being done on the 808x architecture? > > Just my $0.02 worth > > > Peter L. Berghold Lehman Brothers Unix Engineering > Unix Architect VOX: (201) 524-5018 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Australian Cattle Dog Philosophy: "Seize the Cow! Bite the Day!" > >
RE: Palm Pilot & ELKS.
>> Is anyone in the ELKS group planing (or doing) ELKS on the Pilot? We could Pardon my ignorance here, but is in the interests of the ELKS group to branch into the Pilot? Seems to me the expertise here is in the 808x architectures. The PalmPilot is a 68K device. Wouldn't effort in that arena bleach out the excellent work being done on the 808x architecture? Just my $0.02 worth Peter L. Berghold Lehman Brothers Unix Engineering Unix Architect VOX: (201) 524-5018 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australian Cattle Dog Philosophy: "Seize the Cow! Bite the Day!"
Re: Palm Pilot & ELKS.
Simon Wood writes: > > > I am very aware of the uClinux stuff (their mailing list is very active) but > personally I think that the main kernel is too big to fit on a Palm Pilot. > > Is anyone in the ELKS group planing (or doing) ELKS on the Pilot? We could > afterall nick all the stuff they have discovered about the hardware and fold > it back into the ELKS tree. > I think it would be possible to build a kernel for the Pilot taking advantage of the work we have put into making the kernel small, and using code they have done for the low level hardware, but it would be loads of work to merge the effort. The psion 3 is a much more plausible goal, and I have very nearly finished merging the code into the main tree. If old pilots become cheap, and ELKS gets more stable I may buy one and have a fiddle with it. Al
Re: ELKS 0.0.81 available from ftp.ecs.soton.ac.uk
Beau Kuiper writes: > > On Mon, 15 Nov 1999, you wrote: > > Stefan Pettersson writes: > > > > > > On 13-Nov-99 David Murn wrote: > > > > On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Stefan Pettersson wrote: > > > > > > > >> So we are back to the usual problem, where in the 640 kB should we put > > > >> or own EPROM. > > > > > > Sorry, my fingers wasn't syncronized with my brain. What I meant was: > > > > > > So we are back to the usual problem, where in the 640kB..1024kB range should we > > > put or own EPROM. > > > > > > > Most of the cards I own default to putting it at segment 0xd800. > > > > Al > But that isn't large enough for the kernel image (64kb) The area between > d800-F000 is 32kb. A better choice would be probably be c800-d800 or d000-f000. > If my calculations are correct 0xd8000 - 0xf is 96K. 0xd8000 - 0xe is 32K. There should be space in this range. Al
Re: ELKS NIC that will take a 64K rom
Gregory Leblanc writes: > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Alistair Riddoch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 4:19 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: ELKS 0.0.81 available from ftp.ecs.soton.ac.uk > > > > The code Christian has contributed does just this, though I > > have not yet > > been able to get it to work as I am still tracking down a > > network card that > > will take a 64K ROM. I have the plans for a flashcard, but > > have not yet > > been able to get thte parts to build one. > > Do you know which cards will take one, or is that what you're trying to > find? I have quite a number of older NICs here, I'm sure I could spare a > couple, if you knew which ones would take the proper ROM. I am currently trolling through every NIC I can get my hands on trying to work out which can take the ROM. I have a 3c905 in my desktop machine which can take 64K or 128K, but it is not clearly documented anywhere I can find which end of the socket I am supposed to put the ROM, and I could not get it to work in either end when I tried it in both. The other problem is that this card is PCI, so wont go in my test machines, and the fact that I use this machine for development, and for my job. Al
Palm Pilot & ELKS.
I am very aware of the uClinux stuff (their mailing list is very active) but personally I think that the main kernel is too big to fit on a Palm Pilot. Is anyone in the ELKS group planing (or doing) ELKS on the Pilot? We could afterall nick all the stuff they have discovered about the hardware and fold it back into the ELKS tree. Simon Wood PS. I don't own a Pilot - I'm just letting my mind wander from what it should be doing
