linux-mips-fnet
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Deskstation rPC44 and Milo 0.27

To: linux-mips@fnet.fr
Subject: Re: Deskstation rPC44 and Milo 0.27
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 12:27:13 -0600
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 02 Sep 1996 12:36:12 +0200
: Can you hack the code so that it prints exactly what it gets passed by
: the ARC firmware?

Yes.  I was going to do that to see what is going on with the args,
since I'm really wanting to start to use them...

: >     o MILO could pass this detailed information to Linux and Linux
: >       could use it to setup its initial memory maps.
: 
: Indeed, it could do so.  So far I just had the problem that I found
: several ARC BIOSes lying about the available memory.  The Tyne with 8mb
: says it has 2mb available - and another 256mb chunk of memory which
: isn't installed ...
: 
: Reason enough to query the hardware where possible.

Hmmm.  I know that the rPC44 is happy to report correct information
(or nearly so) about the memory.  Is it just the Tyne (which is a
known rogue in many respects), or are there others as well.  I'd
suspect the PICA also, since that was an early board, or maybe the
Magnum, since it is just a stripped down pica (or more accurately a
pica is a built up magnum).

Too bad I don't have hardware docs on the rPC, or I'd know how to ask
the hardware directly.  There doesn't seem to be a R4030 controller
chip like the PICA has on my motherboard to ask (or is that integrated
into the R4400PC and I've just not stumbled across references to it
yet).

: Even better - apparently NT's equivalents to Linux's inb/inw/inl/outb etc.
: functions are macros compiled into NT which means that every MIPS NT
: machine is assumed to have the same 1:1 mapping of ports into memory -
: just the base address is different.

I've seen something similar when disassembling code from NT.  I think
that the pica port in NetBSD and the arc port in OpenBSD do the same
thing.

Warner

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>