On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 18:37 +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 10:36 +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> >> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 23:46 +0100, Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 14:19 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Anyway, there is an unreleased work-in-progress patch for x86 over -rc6
> >>>>> by Philippe. I recently had the chance to test it and hack a bit on the
> >>>>> SMP IO-APIC part. It seems to work fine under UP, but SMP had some
> >>>>> issues that are identified, but still need to be addressed - thanks to
> >>>>> genirq, now in a widely arch-independent way.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Philippe, I know you are very busy, but shouldn't we make a pre-release
> >>>>> available already, also to discuss further how to deal best with genirq
> >>>>> on other platforms beyond x86?
> >>>> Actually, the draft patch I sent you did not boot on my SMP box today,
> >>>> so qemu seems to have been a bit too friendly. Knowing that, issuing a
> >>>> half-baked patch would have made no sense, so I finally refrained from
> >>>> doing that. Since I'm now basically in love with the genirq layer (at
> >>>> least for x86) compared to the utter mess that we had to endure
> >>>> previously, I've decided to tackle the issue completely, and rewrite the
> >>>> I-pipe interrupt flow in order to leverage it. Will post something asap.
> >>>>
> >>> Ok, here we are. I've just merged 2.6.19-ipipe-1.6-00. It has been
> >>> tested on a low-end classic Pentium 90Mhz, a dusty two-way Celeron
> >>> 750Mhz, and on a terrible Celeron 1GHz oldish laptop. Looks ok so far,
> >>> and even passed the horrid "dohell" test on the SMP box, just smiling.
> >>> However, I don't have the required hw at hand to check if our friend the
> >>> MSI support is not killing us once more. This said, the MSI support in
> >>> 2.6.19 also conforms to the genirq specs, so there's hope.
> >>>
> >>> The patch is available from the Adeos download area, and I've also
> >>> committed it to the SVN trunk/.
> >>>
> >>> Feedback welcome,
> >>>
> >>> PS: I have the corresponding quilt-managed patches available upon
> >>> request, to the people who want to use this work as a reference for
> >>> porting to other archs.
> >> You mean that you have separate patches for the common and arch 
> >> dependent part.
> > 
> > Mostly, yes. The patches are split by function, but this usually
> > correlates with the noarch / arch-specific break down view too.
> > 
> >>  That would be nice. I'm interested!
> > 
> > http://download.gna.org/adeos/patches/v2.6/i386/split/
> > 
> >>  As a consequence we 
> >> could provide separated patches in general and prepare-kernel.sh applies 
> >> them in sequence. Just an idea for the future.
> >>
> > 
> > Problem is that we would have to store a set of patches for each Adeos
> > version/arch combo, instead of a single one. What advantage do you see
> > in breaking the Adeos patches down for prepare-kernel.sh?
> 
> Maintenance issues for the noarch part, e.g., if you fix a bug in the 
> common part or add new features it's available for all arch.

I think this should be easier once we have moved to git, pulling commits
is made simple (yeah, I'm late on this too...)

>  But I see 
> your point. It's a bit more complicated and there are also patch version 
> numbers.
> 
> Wolfgang.
-- 
Philippe.



_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to