hi,
i have an alpha here, running 2.5.70 for weeks now. the patch to 2.5.71
applied with no errors (i did "make clean" before this) but it won't
compile:
# make vmlinux modules modules_install
...
CC arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.o
arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.c:269: warning: `srmcons_ops' defined but not used
make[2]: *** [arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [arch/alpha/kernel] Error 2
make: *** [vmlinux] Error 2
------------
compiler is gcc3.3, .config did not change (new options in 2.5.71 with
"No" answered).
Thanks,
Christian.
Christian Kujau <[email protected]> writes:
> i have an alpha here, running 2.5.70 for weeks now. the patch to 2.5.71
> applied with no errors (i did "make clean" before this) but it won't
> compile:
>
> # make vmlinux modules modules_install
>
> ...
>
> CC arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.o
> arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.c:269: warning: `srmcons_ops' defined but not used
> make[2]: *** [arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.o] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [arch/alpha/kernel] Error 2
> make: *** [vmlinux] Error 2
Not looking at the code, I guess you could just remove the definition
of srmcons_ops from srmcons.c.
--
M?ns Rullg?rd
[email protected]
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:00:01AM +0200, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Not looking at the code, I guess you could just remove the definition
> of srmcons_ops from srmcons.c.
No, use appended patch.
Ivan.
--- 2.5.72/arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.c Mon Jun 16 16:00:39 2003
+++ linux/arch/alpha/kernel/srmcons.c Mon Jun 16 16:13:17 2003
@@ -291,6 +291,7 @@ srmcons_init(void)
driver->type = TTY_DRIVER_TYPE_SYSTEM;
driver->subtype = SYSTEM_TYPE_SYSCONS;
driver->init_termios = tty_std_termios;
+ tty_set_operations(driver, &srmcons_ops);
err = tty_register_driver(driver);
if (err) {
put_tty_driver(driver);
Marc Zyngier schrieb:
> Please try this patch :
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=105540998415031&w=2
>
ok, that did it, but then another error showed up:
[...]
AS arch/alpha/lib/stxcpy.o
AS arch/alpha/lib/stxncpy.o
CC arch/alpha/lib/udelay.o
AR arch/alpha/lib/lib.a
CPP arch/alpha/vmlinux.lds.s
GEN .version
CHK include/linux/compile.h
UPD include/linux/compile.h
CC init/version.o
LD init/built-in.o
LD vmlinux
net/built-in.o(.init.text+0x484): In function `flow_cache_init':
: undefined reference to `register_cpu_notifier'
net/built-in.o(.init.text+0x488): In function `flow_cache_init':
: undefined reference to `register_cpu_notifier'
make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
lila:/usr/src/linux-2.5#
oh, just before vmlinux was made! before & after applying the patch i
did "make clean" (do i have to make clean "before" applying patches
anyway? after applying patches and before making targets, yes.)
oh, and this alpha is named "Avanti" but a kernel compile needs 80mins
or so :-)
Thank you,
Christian.
oh, 2.5.72 is out but since it does not touch srmcons.c i applied the
patch to 2.5.72 too and see how it goes.
Thanks,
Christian.
Christian Kujau <[email protected]> writes:
> oh, just before vmlinux was made! before & after applying the patch i
> did "make clean" (do i have to make clean "before" applying patches
> anyway? after applying patches and before making targets, yes.)
I don't think so.
> oh, and this alpha is named "Avanti" but a kernel compile needs 80mins
> or so :-)
That's typical for the slower Avantis. Is your's something like 100 MHz?
--
M?ns Rullg?rd
[email protected]
On Tue, 2003-06-17 20:26:35 +0200, M?ns Rullg?rd <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:
> Christian Kujau <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > oh, and this alpha is named "Avanti" but a kernel compile needs 80mins
> > or so :-)
>
> That's typical for the slower Avantis. Is your's something like 100 MHz?
Well, that's mainly a question of compiler version and the quantity of
modules you attempt to build...
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw [email protected] . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier B?rger" | im Internet! | im Irak!
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(IRAQ_WAR_2 | DRM | TCPA));
Jan-Benedict Glaw schrieb:
>>That's typical for the slower Avantis. Is your's something like 100 MHz?
>
> Well, that's mainly a question of compiler version and the quantity of
> modules you attempt to build...
it's both :-)
lila:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo
cpu : Alpha
cpu model : EV45
cpu variation : 7
cpu revision : 0
cpu serial number :
system type : Avanti
system variation : 0
system revision : 0
system serial number :
cycle frequency [Hz] : 232018561
timer frequency [Hz] : 1024.00
page size [bytes] : 8192
phys. address bits : 34
max. addr. space # : 63
BogoMIPS : 458.36
kernel unaligned acc : 32 (pc=fffffc0000478394,va=fffffc0002dbf176)
user unaligned acc : 0 (pc=0,va=0)
platform string : AlphaStation 255/233
cpus detected : 1
lila:~# find /lib/modules/2.5.70/ | wc -l
62
lila:~#
(still compiling (gcc3.3) 2.5.72....)
yes, after 130 minutes: 2.5.72 _with_ applied srmcons-patch compiled and
has booted fine.
Thanks,
Christian.
yes, after 130 minutes: 2.5.72 _with_ applied srmcons-patch compiled and
has booted fine.
Thanks,
Christian.
Christian Kujau <[email protected]> writes:
> >>That's typical for the slower Avantis. Is your's something like 100 MHz?
> > Well, that's mainly a question of compiler version and the quantity
> > of
> > modules you attempt to build...
>
> it's both :-)
>
> lila:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo
> cpu : Alpha
> cpu model : EV45
> cpu variation : 7
> cpu revision : 0
> cpu serial number :
> system type : Avanti
> system variation : 0
> system revision : 0
> system serial number :
> cycle frequency [Hz] : 232018561
> timer frequency [Hz] : 1024.00
> page size [bytes] : 8192
> phys. address bits : 34
> max. addr. space # : 63
> BogoMIPS : 458.36
> kernel unaligned acc : 32 (pc=fffffc0000478394,va=fffffc0002dbf176)
That's not good. Do you know what is causing it.
> user unaligned acc : 0 (pc=0,va=0)
> platform string : AlphaStation 255/233
I use one of those for a firewall/router.
> cpus detected : 1
--
M?ns Rullg?rd
[email protected]
Christian Kujau <[email protected]> writes:
> yes, after 130 minutes: 2.5.72 _with_ applied srmcons-patch compiled
> and has booted fine.
Good, what's it like performance-wise? 2.5.68 had trouble with my IDE
disks, and I wonder if it's been fixed since.
--
M?ns Rullg?rd
[email protected]
M?ns Rullg?rd schrieb:
>>lila:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo
[...]
>>kernel unaligned acc : 32 (pc=fffffc0000478394,va=fffffc0002dbf176)
>
> That's not good. Do you know what is causing it.
i did not even know that this one is bad. the only weird thing which
comes into my mind when thinking about this alpha is: it is filled up
whith fine 128 MB RAM -- but it is only seeing 64 MB. when we inserted
64 MB RAM, only 32 MB are recognized. with 32 MB working with it was no
fun, working with 64 MB is quite good. must be the type of RAM but i
don't really know much about the different RAM types.
> Good, what's it like performance-wise? 2.5.68 had trouble with my IDE
> disks, and I wonder if it's been fixed since.
can't tell about IDE, since it has only scsi in it. i used to run
benchmarks (tiobench) on the alpha, with different loop-mounted
filesystems, but the alpha has been frozen very often during these
benchmarks...will redo with 2.5.72 later.
Thanks,
Christian.
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Christian Kujau wrote:
> i did not even know that this one is bad. the only weird thing which
> comes into my mind when thinking about this alpha is: it is filled up
> whith fine 128 MB RAM -- but it is only seeing 64 MB. when we inserted
> 64 MB RAM, only 32 MB are recognized. with 32 MB working with it was no
> fun, working with 64 MB is quite good. must be the type of RAM but i
> don't really know much about the different RAM types.
Is this SDRAM? May be 4-bank SDRAM, while your memory controller supports
2-bank SDRAM only.
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