Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-05-09

On 9 May 2019, at 20:31, Frank Scheiner wrote: > > Hi Adrian, > > On 5/9/19 18:24, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> I just uploaded updated installation images 2019-05-09 for the >> following Debian Ports architectures: >> [...] >> * sparc64 >> >> I uploaded both CD images [1] as well as

Re: Any progress with grub-installer?

On 7 Jan 2019, at 20:47, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > Hi! > > On 1/7/19 9:23 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote: >>> Yes, but I know what I did. I‘m not sure why you are questioning that. Do >>> you see any unexpected results? >> >> No, but from the `grub-install` output I didn't expect that

Re: ZFS'ing my T5120 with Debian

On 26 May 2018, at 17:08, Chris Ross wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 11:39:49PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> On 05/25/2018 09:38 PM, Chris Ross wrote: >>> root@t5120:/var/tmp# grub-install /dev/sda >>> Installing for sparc64-ieee1275 platform. >>>

Re: ZFS'ing my T5120 with Debian

On 23 May 2018, at 18:48, Chris Ross wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:56:49PM -0400, Chris Ross wrote: >> Booting an installer may not work, though, since I need ZFS support in the >> system I'm running. To get a d-i with ZFS built in, I presume I'd have to >> build

Re: ZFS'ing my T5120 with Debian

On 22 May 2018, at 20:40, Chris Ross wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 01:54:36PM -0400, Chris Ross wrote: >> I have a T5120 currently running on sdd, and want to install a fresh debian >> on ZFS datasets on sda through sdc. I want to install a fresh OS onto those >>

Re: Starting up Debian on a T5120

On 6 May 2018, at 04:15, Chris Ross <cross+deb...@distal.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 01:35:06AM +0100, James Clarke wrote: >> For building, I imagine the way to do it is: >> >> 1. Add: >> deb [arch=all] http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable contr

Re: Starting up Debian on a T5120

On 4 May 2018, at 20:34, Chris Ross wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 07:14:16PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> The problem here, again, is that sparc64 is part of Debian Ports which >> doesn't build any packages from the "contrib" and "non-free" distributions.

Re: Bug#887494: mozjs52: FTBFS on sparc64: interpreter segfaults

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 08:52:58PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 01/17/2018 01:43 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > I can whip up a patch for mozjs52 to add sparc64 support if there is > > a realistic chance for it to be merged. My m68k [3] and sh4 [4] patches for > > mozjs52

Re: [sparc64] possible to install older binutils on sakharov.debian.net

On 12 Mar 2018, at 20:18, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebast...@breakpoint.cc> wrote: > On 2018-03-11 22:50:16 [+0000], James Clarke wrote: >> You can either add the directory to your PATH, or pass -B/path/goes/here. The >> search order is prefixes (-B), then /usr{,/local}/lib

Re: IP auto-config with DHCP on sparc64 possibly broken

On 18 Feb 2018, at 21:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 02/18/2018 10:10 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> See my emphasis above. It's not that the network stack is broken, it's just >> that >> the tool you are using is apparently producing unaligned

Re: Bug#889147: abyss: PairedDBG_LoadAlgorithm test fails on sparc64 due to strict alignment violation

On 2 Feb 2018, at 15:49, David Matthew Mattli <d...@mattli.us> wrote: > > James Clarke <jrt...@debian.org> writes: > >> user debian-sparc@lists.debian.org >> usertags sparc64 >> thanks >> >> (You missed the User: pseudoheader) >&

Re: Bug#889147: abyss: PairedDBG_LoadAlgorithm test fails on sparc64 due to strict alignment violation

user debian-sparc@lists.debian.org usertags sparc64 thanks (You missed the User: pseudoheader) > On 2 Feb 2018, at 14:46, David Matthew Mattli wrote: > > Package: abyss > Severity: normal > Tags: patch upstream > Usertags: sparc64 > > Dear Maintainer, > > This package

Re: The end of my Ultrasparc 5?!?

On 26 Jan 2018, at 00:10, Sean Whitney <sean.whit...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 01/25/2018 04:03 PM, James Clarke wrote: >> On 25 Jan 2018, at 23:58, Sean Whitney <sean.whit...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I recently switched from sparc to sparc64 using the c

Re: The end of my Ultrasparc 5?!?

On 25 Jan 2018, at 23:58, Sean Whitney wrote: > > I recently switched from sparc to sparc64 using the cdrom drive in September. > Sometime in the last two weeks the server rebooted and when it tried to > restart it hung trying to find a btrfs filesystem, which I don't

Re: Packages libklibc and klibc-utils missing for sparc64 on p.d.o

On 13 Jan 2018, at 16:10, Frank Scheiner wrote: > > Hi all, > > I today wanted to check if a new libklibc package is available for sparc64 > that includes the fixes by James. I'd like to get my SPARC machines into a > working state again. :-) > > But unfortunately the

[PATCH] [klibc] Fix sparc assembly when compiled as PIC

Some distributions default to PIE for their compilers, which on sparc is passed on to the assembler. Since the behaviour of %hi/%lo changes under PIC to become GOT offsets, the current assembly files need adapting to not try to use a GOT offset as an absolute address. ---

Bug#884642: libgo11: Please backport upstream sparc64 fix

Package: libgo11 Version: 7.2.0-17 Tags: upstream fixed-upstream patch User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, For a while, libgo11 on sparc64 has been broken, with executables crashing with messages like: > runtime: lfstackpush

Re: Test atomic operations on SPARC 32-bit

On 10 Dec 2017, at 10:01, Romain Dolbeau wrote: > 2017-12-10 2:19 GMT+01:00 Petr Vorel : >> I test it (in my github fork of) LTP project [1], but unfortunately some >> tests which heavy >> test it fails. > > With a large number of threads, the

Re: Bug#876147: camp frequently FTBFS on 64bit big endian: camptest-qt (Failed)

On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 09:49:05AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Flavien, > > I have put the porter lists of the affected architectures in CC whether > there is somebody who has a hint for a better solution than removing > these architectures from the supported architectures. This kind of >

New sparc64 porterbox

Hi, Some of you may have noticed that the existing sparc64 porterbox, notker.debian.net[0], has been unavailable for the past few months. As a result, we have commissioned a new porterbox, sakharov.debian.net[1], kindly hosted by Anatoly Pugachev, available to all DDs. The machine is set up to

Bug#878317: pygobject: FTBFS on sparc64 due to SIGBUS in testsuite

Source: pygobject Version: 3.24.1-3 Tags: upstream patch Forwarded: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=788894 User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, Currently, pygobject FTBFS on sparc64 due to performing an unaligned access

Bug#875977: libhdf5-100: Performs unaligned accesses on sparc64

Package: libhdf5-100 Version: 1.10.0-patch1+docs-3 Tags: upstream patch User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org, Ghislain Vaillant Control: affects -1 src:h5py Hi, Currently libhdf5-100 performs unaligned memory

Re: Updated debian-installer images

ian.org/Sparc64#Installing_the_Debian_SPARC64_Port >> We should probably ask the person who wrote this wiki page. > > Ah I see, I assumed that would be you because of the info related to your > ISOs and the installation process on different machines. Is that James Clarke > then

Re: Latest Debian SPARC64 ISO Image

> On 5 Sep 2017, at 19:47, Fedor Konstantinov wrote: > > Hi, James. > > I have just tried to install Debian on my sparc64 machine, the SF V210 > server, and found that there's no "Install SILO boot loader" option in the > installer. Is this a bug? > There're also no any silo*

Bug#874074: ld.so: TLS relocations against local symbols don't work on powerpc, sparc and sparc64

Package: libc6 Version: 2.24-17 Tags: upstream patch Forwarded: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2017-09/msg00120.html User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc sparc64 User: debian-powe...@lists.debian.org Usertags: powerpc X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org,

Bug#872483: erlang-cherly: FTBFS on sparc64 due to bad uintptr size

Source: erlang-cherly Version: 0.12.8+dfsg-7 Severity: important Tags: patch upstream User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, Currently erlang-cherly FTBFS on sparc64 due to SIGBUSes in the test suite. On investigating, I found this

Bug#870773: motif: flex now has yyleng as an int again

Source: motif Version: 2.3.4-13 Severity: important Tags: patch User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, Currently src:motif FTBFS on sparc64 due to wml crashing with SIGBUS (no build logs available, as libfl-dev was broken on sparc64

Re: No login prompt after booting in LDOM on SPARC Enterprise T5120

On 19 Jul 2017, at 21:11, Gabriel Pérez-Cerezo wrote: > John Paul Adrian Glaubitz writes: > >> Are you sure that ttyS0 is the name of your serial device? >> >> Check the kernel messages. It might be named differently. > > It may be named ttyHV0,

Re: sources.list

> On 15 Jul 2017, at 21:42, Tom Demler wrote: > > On the Debian wiki page for Sparc64 I believe the sources.list entries are > suggested to be: > > deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-ports unstable main > deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable main > deb

Re: serial connection on debian on sun ultra10

On 12 Jul 2017, at 06:39, Frans van Berckel wrote: > On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 21:13 +0200, sacarde wrote: > >> I did experiment: >> I replaced kernel+initrd (4.5.0) in deb-9-iso >> with kernel+initrd (3.2.0) from deb-7.11-iso > > Are you able to release this iso for

Bug#867987: h5py: FTBFS on sparc64 due to unaliged accesses in test suite

Source: h5py Version: 2.7.0-1 Tags: upstream patch Forwarded: https://github.com/h5py/h5py/pull/904 User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, Currently h5py FTBFS on sparc64 (and has done for as long as sparc64 has been building packages

Bug#866509: openblas: Please enable on sparc64

Source: openblas Version: 0.2.19-3 Tags: patch User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, The upstream code supports 64-bit SPARC; please apply the attached debdiff to enable the build. Regards, James diff -Nru

Bug#866407: alljoyn-core-1504: FTBFS on sparc64 due to missing baud rate defines

Source: alljoyn-core-1504 Version: 15.04b-8 Tags: patch upstream fixed-upstream User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Control: clone -1 -2 Control: retitle -2 alljoyn-core-1509: FTBFS on sparc64 due to missing baud rate defines Control:

Bug#866011: git: FTBFS on sparc64 due to unaligned access in pack-bitmap.c

access in pack-bitmap. Please find attached the patch submitted upstream (mailing list index has not yet updated, hence the lack of a Forwarded:). Regards, James From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> To: gits...@pobox.com Cc: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com>, g...@vger.kernel

Bug#865908: haskell-cryptohash: FTBFS on sparc64 due to unaligned accesses

, which is a backport of the cryptonite changes. Regards, James Description: Fix many cases of unaligned memory accesses Author: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> Forwarded: https://github.com/vincenthz/hs-cryptohash/pull/44/files --- This patch header follows DEP-3: http://dep.debian.net/dep

Bug#865906: haskell-cryptonite: FTBFS on sparc64 due to unaligned accesses

of unaligned memory accesses Author: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> Forwarded: https://github.com/haskell-crypto/cryptonite/pull/175 --- This patch header follows DEP-3: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/ --- a/cbits/cryptonite_align.h +++ b/cbits/cryptonite_align.h @@ -34,18 +34,124 @@ #

Re: How to recover from blank screen on sparc64

On 21 Jun 2017, at 14:31, Tom Demler wrote: > I finally was successful installing sparc64 on my old Ultra Enterprise II. I > had to switch the output to the ttya port and have it connected to a serial > port on a laptop in order to do the install from the ISO image on CD.

Bug#862062: FTBFS on sparc64 due to SIGBUS in test suite

Source: systemd Version: 233-6 Tags: upstream patch Forwarded: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/5622 User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, Currently systemd FTBFS in experimental on sparc64 due to journal-importer performing

Re: Bug#649241: binutils: Either gas or ld is doing the wrong thing with R_SPARC_WDISP22 relocations on sparc

Control: retitle -1 binutils: ld should give an error for WDISP relocations against preemptible symbols Control: severity -1 normal On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:21:25PM +0100, James Clarke wrote: > 2. Perhaps new R_SPARC_WPLT{10,16,19,22} should be introduced to allow > shorter tai

Re: Bug#649241: binutils: Either gas or ld is doing the wrong thing with R_SPARC_WDISP22 relocations on sparc

(Hooray for investigating long-standing bug reports?) On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 09:41:21AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > Package: binutils > Version: 2.21.90.20111025-1 > Severity: important > > In Iceweasel 9, there is a piece of assembly that can be simplified as > the following: > > .text >

Bug#858049: Please add ufs-modules udeb on sparc64

CD could mount these partitions, but at the moment there is no ufs-modules udeb available for d-i to include. Please apply the attached patch to create one on sparc64 so we can add it to d-i. Thanks, James >From 77a8ef24e9059ae1d1c9617861b78d711ecdbd94 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: James Cla

Re: Missing virtio modules for sparc64

On 17 Mar 2017, at 11:42, Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk> wrote: > On 17/03/17 11:40, James Clarke wrote: >> On 17 Mar 2017, at 11:36, Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk> >> wrote: >>> On 17/03/17 11:33, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz

Re: Missing virtio modules for sparc64

On 17 Mar 2017, at 11:36, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > On 17/03/17 11:33, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > >> On 03/17/2017 12:22 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: >>> There is one issue I've found in that the debian-installer fails to >>> detect the installation CDROM

Re: Retrieving disk info from sunvdc using udevadm

On 16 Mar 2017, at 12:15, Anatoly Pugachev wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:14 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Some Debian users who are installing Debian for sparc64 in an LDOM run into >> the problem that the

Re: openjdk-8 build failure on landau, unable to reproduce locally

On 11 Mar 2017, at 19:39, David Matthew Mattli wrote: > > Several of the last openjdk-8 builds have failed with a segfault[0] but > I haven't been able to reproduce the failure locally. Looking at the > list of build logs[1] I noticed that the last successful build was by > andi

Re: Strange failures on 4.9.6-3 kernel

On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:08, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zane...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 09/02/2017 20:14, James Clarke wrote: >>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 21:31, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zane...@linaro.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>>

Re: Strange failures on 4.9.6-3 kernel

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 21:31, Adhemerval Zanella > wrote: > > Hi all, > > While testing glibc on the kindly provided T5 machine from Debian environment, > I started to see some strange issues on sparc64 where glibc is failing on > mostly static tests. > > Funny

Bug#854090: gcc-6: Please enable PIE hardening flags by default on sparc*

Package: gcc-6 User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Please enable PIE by default on sparc and sparc64. Regards, James

Re: Grub2 with sparc64 patches

On 26 Jan 2017, at 17:08, Adrian Davey wrote: > On 2017-01-26 16:52, louis ayotte wrote: >> On 2017-01-25 03:02 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >>> On 01/25/2017 08:21 PM, Eric Snowberg wrote: I believe you are running out of memory here because grub is trying to

Re: Bug#764432: FTBFS on sparc, segfault in TestAlignment

if a non-zero offset is given (well, if you give offset as a multiple of 8, that's fine, since it won't break the alignment). The attached patch ensures that the header is always pointer-size-aligned. In fact, since Debian uses gcc, it could use __alignof__(struct _aligned_meminfo) instead of sizeof(v

Bug#852401: SIGBUS due to gdk_x11_window_set_opacity on sparc64

testsuite in a call to gdk_x11_window_set_opacity with a SIGBUS. This turns out to be a bug in GTK+, which was fixed in GTK+3.0 but never backported. Patch attached. Regards, James >From 710f538d68e6f9ca0b2fbe38df3f8ee35ddd0126 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com>

libx11: Issues with Data32/_XData32

Hi, I've been debugging an issue in gtk2-perl causing it to SIGBUS on sparc64, and traced it back to what seems to be dodgy code inside libx11. One of the tests calls gdk_window_set_opacity, which calls XChangeProperty with a pointer to a guint32, cast to char*, with the length set to 32 bits as

Re: Bug#827815: libmozjs-24-0: initialization segfaults on sparc64

On 15 Jan 2017, at 19:32, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 7:26 PM, Simon McVittie wrote: >> On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 at 17:06:00 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >>> For the time being, Firefox upstream is now using the arm64

Re: Bug#827815: libmozjs-24-0: initialization segfaults on sparc64

On 15 Jan 2017, at 18:26, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 at 17:06:00 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> For the time being, Firefox upstream is now using the arm64 workaround on >> sparc64 >> as well which fixed Firefox on sparc64. Firefox will be fixed on

Bug#851176: FTBFS on sparc64: invalid heap expanding (base_length: 89, GC.stat[:heap_eden_pages]: 92)

Source: ruby2.3 Version: 2.3.3-1 Severity: important User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Currently, ruby2.3 FTBFS on sparc64 (and has done for a while) due to a single test case failure: > 1) Failure: > TestGc#test_expand_heap

Bug#850250: FTBFS on sparc with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nolang=biarch

Source: gcc-6 Version: 6.3.0-2 Tags: patch User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertag: sparc X-Debbugs-Cc: helm...@debian.org, debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Thanks to the recent changes to get gcc to target ultrasparc by default, the biarch build is now successful. However, it still fails in

Bug#849542: PIE specs ignored even with DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS hardening

Package: gcc-6 Version: 6.2.1-7 Severity: important The check introduced to ignore dpkg's PIE specs when PIE is not enabled by default is wrong, and ends up ignoring them even when hardening=+all or hardening=+pie is present in DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS. The current check is: > if

Re: XVR500 and SysVInit

Hi, > > On 21 Dec 2016, at 13:36, transmail wrote: > > Hi. > > I just would like to know, if the Sparc64 port of Debian 9 will > support my XVR500 card in my Sun Blade 100 The kernel's config has CONFIG_FB_XVR500=y (as well as 2500 and 1000), so I assume yes. > and

Re: Kernel Panic with updating

> On 8 Dec 2016, at 17:31, Louis Liu wrote: > > Hi all, > > My system panics when updating packages. > > System: > Sun Netra T1-105 > Linux FirstRangers 4.8.0-1-sparc64 #1 Debian 4.8.7-1 (2016-11-13) > sparc64 GNU/Linux > > The system panics every time with the command: >

Re: git kernel (4.9.0-rc5; was 4.9.0-rc3) hard lockup on cpu

Here’s a more detailed dump for a 4.9.0-rc5+ kernel (commit 81bcfe5e48f9b8c42cf547f1c74c7f60c44c34c8). If I’m interpreting the output correctly, it seems the kworkers are all blocked on RCU barriers, waiting for an outstanding request, presumably because CPU 64 didn’t perform its requested action

Re: Segmentation faults with aptitude and apt-get on some packages

> On 28 Nov 2016, at 22:07, rod wrote: >> On 11/18/2016 4:32 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >>> On 11/16/2016 06:13 PM, rod wrote: >>> The current problem I'm having is this: >>> >>> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# aptitude >>> Ouch! Got SIGSEGV, dying.. >>>

Re: New Debian sparc installation images

> On 27 Nov 2016, at 18:29, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > wrote: > > Hi Kieron! > >> On 11/27/2016 04:10 PM, Kieron Gillespie wrote: >> Nov 27 14:59:50 debootstrap: sh: apt_dest: unknown operand >> Nov 27 14:59:50 debootstrap: /usr/sbin/debootstrap: line 607: :

Re: [PATCH] silo: Add 64-bit support

> On 24 Nov 2016, at 22:26, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > wrote: > > On 11/24/2016 11:05 PM, Aaro Koskinen wrote: >> I think that's your job to try. If you want to "add 64-bit support" >> (instead of forcing it to everybody), do the required changes so that >> it's

Bug#844782: Please revert problematic sparc64 GOT patch

Source: binutils Version: 2.27.51.20161118-1 Severity: important User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi Matthias, While global symbol references are now fine, we've noticed that TLS is broken in a similar way, except in this case the

Re: Segmentation faults with aptitude and apt-get on some packages

> On 16 Nov 2016, at 22:26, rod <r.schn...@mythos.freeddns.org> wrote: >> On 11/16/2016 2:12 PM, rod wrote: >>> On 11/16/2016 1:32 PM, James Clarke wrote: >>> Hi Rod, >>>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 17:13, rod <r.schn...@mythos.freeddns.org> wrote: >&

Re: Segmentation faults with aptitude and apt-get on some packages

Hi Rod, > On 16 Nov 2016, at 17:13, rod wrote: > > I followed the guide you wrote (after dumping debian for solaris to > reset the sc> password). It works well as written, covering all the > issues that came up. > > The current problem I'm having is this: > >

Re: configure sources.list

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 21:55, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: >> On 11/14/2016 10:53 PM, James Clarke wrote: >> Except it’s not in main (the clue’s in the name)... > > Right. Then it's probably a good idea to add "contr

Re: configure sources.list

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 21:51, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > wrote: > > On 11/14/2016 10:29 PM, rod wrote: >> Suggestions on how to get rid of the tg3 error? Should I even be >> bothered by them as it does connect to the internet? > > APT says, the firmware files are

Re: configure sources.list

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 21:18, rod wrote: >> On 11/14/2016 9:51 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >>> On 11/14/2016 04:34 PM, rod wrote: >>> Thanks for the quick response. Now I know how my day is going to go. I >>> think I have another functioning machine which I

Re: configure sources.list

Hi Rod, > On 14 Nov 2016, at 15:21, rod wrote: > > Good morning (CDT), > > Q: If I change to sources.list to what's below on a machine running; > > rod@cplus:~$ uname -a > Linux cplus 3.2.0-4-sparc64 #1 Debian 3.2.68-1+deb7u3 sparc64 GNU/Linux > > and go through

Re: Bug#843826: PIE specs file leads to segfaults on sparc64

> On 10 Nov 2016, at 05:35, Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi! > > On Wed, 2016-11-09 at 23:46:42 +, James Clarke wrote: >> Package: dpkg-dev >> Version: 1.18.13 >> Severity: important >> User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org >&

Bug#842780: Fix SIGBUS on sparc64

Source: ghc Version: 8.0.1-8 Severity: important Tags: patch X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 Hi, Please find attached a patch to ensure GHC does not perform unaligned accesses on sparc64 (and sparc if native code gen is disabled,

Re: ravirin down

which I usually do when I see seg fault errors, > and it wouldn't return one. Maybe it's a ghost. Today's the day for them. > > Rod > > On 10/31/2016 9:18 AM, James Clarke wrote: >> Hi Rod, >> Don’t worry; those are all down to me (a kernel module to dump vmap_

Re: ravirin down

0 ip fff1013e8644 > (rpc fff100841884) sp 07feffc275e1 error 30001 in > libc-2.24.so[fff10135c000+15e000] > > Not sure what it means nor what I can do to help fix it. Thoughts. > > Rod > > > On 10/27/2016 7:07 AM, James Clarke wrote: >> Hi Rod, >>

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

> On 27 Oct 2016, at 16:51, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 09:25:36 +0100 > >> I’ve run it on the T5 and it seems to work without lockups: >> >> [5948090.988821] vln_in

Re: ravirin down

Thanks! I'll put the new kernel on there. James > On 27 Oct 2016, at 15:11, rod <r.schn...@mythos.freeddns.org> wrote: > > James, > > He's back up. Let me know if you need anything else. > > Rod > >> On 10/27/2016 7:07 AM, James Clarke wrote: >>

ravirin down

Hi Rod, It seems ravirin has been down for at least the past few days. Could you please give it some love? If it’s crashed/hung with CPU lockups, I’ve built a 4.9 kernel with a patch to fix this which I’d like to test. Thanks, James

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

> On 27 Oct 2016, at 02:27, James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> wrote: > >> On 26 Oct 2016, at 22:02, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> >> From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> >> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 21:05:36 +0100 >> >

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

> On 26 Oct 2016, at 22:02, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 21:05:36 +0100 > >> Thanks for this, it's now compiling. I'll let you know if it works >> within the next 24 hours. &

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 03:04:59PM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 18:21:06 +0100 > > >> On 26 Oct 2016, at 18:09, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > >> > >> From: James Clarke &l

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

> On 26 Oct 2016, at 18:09, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:58:16 +0100 > >>> On 26 Oct 2016, at 16:54, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >>> >>>

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

> On 26 Oct 2016, at 16:54, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:28:05 +0100 > >> Any progress on TLB flushing? > > I was half-way through an implementation when I noticed that

Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Handle extremely large kernel TSB range flushes sanely.

Based upon a patch and report by James Clarke. > > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <da...@davemloft.net> > --- > > James this is the final version I pushed into the tree. Great, thanks. Any progress on TLB flushing? James

Re: NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup

> On 25 Oct 2016, at 18:27, David Miller wrote: > > From: David Miller > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 13:18:08 -0400 (EDT) > >> So the full virtual address comparison is something like: >> >> unsigned long compare = (tag >> 22) << 22; /* Clear CONTEXT

Re: NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup

> On 25 Oct 2016, at 18:04, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:59:04 +0100 > >> That’s basically the same as my patch, except this potentially flushes things >> outside [

Re: NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup

> On 25 Oct 2016, at 16:50, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:22:31 -0400 (EDT) > >> From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> >> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:11:52 +0100

Re: NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup

> On 25 Oct 2016, at 16:07, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 14:15:26 +0100 > >> I built a custom kernel with a single extra printk at the start of >> flush_tsb_kernel_range

NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup

Hi, We've been having regular soft lockups on our servers (various different kinds of hardware); on one in particular which sees heavy load, this can happen every 24h. When it happens, the whole machine grinds to a halt, and it needs to be hard rebooted. The recurring stack trace given on the

Re: Regression with 4.7.2 on sun4u

> On 24 Oct 2016, at 19:11, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 10:51:28 +0100 > >> @@ -19,12 +19,20 @@ void arch_jump_label_transform(struct jump_entry *entry, >> if (type == JU

Re: Regression with 4.7.2 on sun4u

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 09:07:26PM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 22:52:45 +0100 > > > This indeed was the case. The attached patch fixes the problem for me, > > generating 0x1062, which gdb can ve

Re: Regression with 4.7.2 on sun4u

> On 21 Oct 2016, at 18:47, James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> wrote: >> On 21 Oct 2016, at 18:26, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> >> From: Rob Gardner <rob.gard...@oracle.com> >> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:49:30 -0600 >> >>&

Re: Regression with 4.7.2 on sun4u

(On phone, sorry for top-posting) Yes, I found that. I don't think its overflowing, more negative (hence the 3ff2, which would be f88 or something like that for off). Trying with that masked appropriately. If it works I'll send a patch with appropriate BUG_ONs. James > On 21 Oct 2016,

Re: Regression with 4.7.2 on sun4u

> On 21 Oct 2016, at 16:49, Rob Gardner wrote: > > On 10/21/2016 06:57 AM, Anatoly Pugachev wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Anatoly Pugachev >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:

Re: Bug#840574: Please backport libgo fixes for sparc64

anything else to make this happen. I will also see if I can get them backported upstream (though even with that you'll still need to faff about with the .obj or drop the test...). Thanks, James > On 16.10.2016 19:40, James Clarke wrote: > > Control: tags -1 - help + patch > > &

Re: Bug#840423 closed by James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> (Re: Bug#840423: New upstream version with sparc64 support)

Control: reopen -1 In fact, 9bb9f09 itself broke sparc64 and s390x. Please update to 002cbb5 to fix this. Regards, James signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#840423: New upstream version with sparc64 support

. I probably should have checked the PTS before sending this... A Closes: would have been helpful though. James > > On Oct 16, 2016, at 7:45 PM, James Clarke <jrt...@jrtc27.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:27:37PM +0100, James Clarke wrote:

Re: Bug#840423: New upstream version with sparc64 support

Hi, On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:27:37PM +0100, James Clarke wrote: > Source: golang-golang-x-sys > Version: 0.0~git20160704.0.a408501-1 > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org > User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org > Usertags: sparc64 > > Hi, > Upstream has made several

Re: Bug#840574: Please backport libgo fixes for sparc64

or gcc-6, but what about the clone changes? I can understand if that's too invasive, but backporting would be great. Regards, James > On 12.10.2016 23:35, James Clarke wrote: > > Source: gcc-6 > > Version: 6.2.0-6 > > User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org > > Use

Bug#840574: Please backport libgo fixes for sparc64

Source: gcc-6 Version: 6.2.0-6 User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Tags: patch fixed-upstream Hi, Could you please backport the patches listed below so that we can have a working gccgo? They fix the (minor) issue of using the wrong

Bug#840423: New upstream version with sparc64 support

Source: golang-golang-x-sys Version: 0.0~git20160704.0.a408501-1 X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 Hi, Upstream has made several commits to golang.org/x/sys since the last uploaded version, the latest being adding sparc64 support

  1   2   >