ARM26 [NEW ARCHITECTURE]
Hi.
I want to submit the ARM26 architecture. its still broken, but its getting there. now a couple more people want to hack on it, so I'd appreciate it if you could put the non-invasive parts into the kernel tree for me.
I have two patches - one to add arch/arm26 and another to add the corresponding incluse/asm-arm26
will you accept them?
Signature · 5 lines
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. Systems programmers keep it up longer.
Quoted 11 lines · Ian Molton
Hi.
I want to submit the ARM26 architecture. its still broken, but its getting there. now a couple more people want to hack on it, so I'd appreciate it if you could put the non-invasive parts into the kernel tree for me.
I have two patches - one to add
arch/arm26and another to add the corresponding incluse/asm-arm26will you accept them?
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think about it however and also is this 2.4 or 2.5 targetted ?
Quoted 3 lines · On 13 May 2003 15:23:39 +0100 Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think about it however and also is this 2.4 or 2.5 targetted ?
I know its a bit insane, but there appears (at long last!) to be a small community picking up ;-)
Russell is fine with it, and in fact, you can see he has begun accepting patches from me to remove arm26 from 2.5.
it is 2.5 targetted currently 2.5.30, but the arch/ and asm/ stuff is independant as far as the rest of the tree is concerned, so it may as well go in as 'current' and then I can submit smaller patches to 'catch up' with the rest.
it actually compiles on 2.5.30 (at least, some of it does ;-) and runs, excpet so far, mm stuff fails and user-land falls over HARD ver early.
where do I send my patches? ;-)
Signature · 5 lines
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. Systems programmers keep it up longer.
Quoted 9 lines · Ian Molton
it is 2.5 targetted currently 2.5.30, but the
arch/and asm/ stuff is independant as far as the rest of the tree is concerned, so it may as well go in as 'current' and then I can submit smaller patches to 'catch up' with the rest.it actually compiles on 2.5.30 (at least, some of it does ;-) and runs, excpet so far, mm stuff fails and user-land falls over HARD ver early.
where do I send my patches? ;-)
I'll roll the include/asm and arch/arm26 bits into -ac happily, if only so they are seen for criticism. (Read hch filling your mailbox 8))
Quoted 2 lines · Alan Cox
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think about it however and also is this 2.4 or 2.5 targetted ?
I'm fine with it; I'd rather someone else (who has more interest in the machines) picked it up.
The basic idea is to rip out the arm26 code from arch/arm and include/asm-arm, thereby allowing include/asm-arm/proc-armv to be collapsed into include/asm-arm, removing some clutter.
Separating it out should also allow arm26 to shrink down to something smaller, which is fairly critical for these machines.
Signature · 2 lines
Russell King ([email protected]) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
Quoted 3 lines · On Tue, 13 May 2003 17:00:29 +0100 Russell King <[email protected]> wrote:
The basic idea is to rip out the arm26 code from
arch/armandinclude/asm-arm, thereby allowinginclude/asm-arm/proc-armvto be collapsed intoinclude/asm-arm, removing some clutter.
Yep.
speaking of which - let me know when you want the next round of patches to remove the ARM26 stuff from arch/arm please ;-)
Quoted 2 lines
Separating it out should also allow arm26 to shrink down to something smaller, which is fairly critical for these machines.
Yep. the [compiled size of the] kernel has already begun to decrease, and its looking quite promising (If I ever get the time to finish it!)
I just want to get it 'out there' so the couple of other folks interested can start hacking on it too.
I have an ide driver too, if anyone wants to submit it for the mainstream kernel. It drives SIMTEC IDE cards, found in Acorn machines, and is, of course, non-invasive to the tree. Its for 2.4. I'd imagine Russell would be happy to let someone else take it off his hands? (Russell?)
Signature · 5 lines
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. Systems programmers keep it up longer.
Quoted 1 line · Alan Cox
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think
Wait until we're gonna submit the TekExpress port for 2.4.22... ;-)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Quoted 8 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Quoted 1 line · Alan Cox
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think
Wait until we're gonna submit the TekExpress port for 2.4.22... ;-)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
That's hilarious and ironic. It was because of the hefty price of things like the TekXpress XP15 that I first got interested in Linux (Slackware 1.0.2) as a relatively cheap and effective X-terminal for our clients running on a DECstation 5000 (MIPS R3000).
The name TekExpress or TekXpress could be confusing since some had 68020 or 68030 CPUs and some had the MIPS R3000 if I remember correctly. Googling shows quite a few variants of name/CPU type.
Steven
Quoted 6 lines · Steven Cole
Quoted 4 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Quoted 1 line · Alan Cox
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think
Wait until we're gonna submit the TekExpress port for 2.4.22... ;-)
Quoted 8 lines
That's hilarious and ironic. It was because of the hefty price of things like the TekXpress XP15 that I first got interested in Linux (Slackware 1.0.2) as a relatively cheap and effective X-terminal for our clients running on a DECstation 5000 (MIPS R3000).
The name TekExpress or TekXpress could be confusing since some had 68020 or 68030 CPUs and some had the MIPS R3000 if I remember correctly. Googling shows quite a few variants of name/CPU type.
I was talking about the m68k variants.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Quoted 4 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Quoted 1 line · Alan Cox
I guess its no crazier than the MacII port. What does Russell think
Wait until we're gonna submit the TekExpress port for 2.4.22... ;-)
And a port of qemu so it can run x86 binaries too ?