linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FPU interrupt handler

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Subject: Re: FPU interrupt handler
From: "Houten K.H.C. van (Karel)" <vhouten@kpn.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:07:54 +0100
Cc: "Houten K.H.C. van (Karel)" <vhouten@kpn.com>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:50:13 +0100." <Pine.GSO.3.96.1011126142508.21598H-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Reply-to: vhouten@kpn.com
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Hi Maciej,

>  Hmm, for R3k gcc 2.95.3 + binutils 2.11.2 as available at my site seem to
> be rock solid.
> 
>  For R4k you need binutils 2.11.92, as there is a problem with dla/la
> expansion in the Ulf's patch for .mips3+.  That actually can be fixed in
> 2.11.2 easily but I was going to switch to 2.11.92 anyway, as it has more
> MIPS/Linux support integrated and 2.12 is supposedly soon to be released.
> Unfortunately 2.11.92 is not as stable as 2.11.2 due to generic ELF code
> problems, but I'm trying to track changes and spot a more stable snapshot.

I'm using the RedHat 7.1 packages from oss:
binutils-2.11.92.0.10-1.mips.rpm
gcc-2.96-99.1.mips.rpm


> > Some kernels don't start-up, others hang just before forking init,
> > and all have problems with my serial console.
> 
>  Well, I'm very happy with a /240 running a 2.4.14 snapshot dated
> 20011123.  For a /260 I need a small, but critical bugfix I'm sending to
> the list right now.  I wonder how was it possible for the bug to remain
> uncovered for so long as it's absolutely lethal and often triggered (I've
> only got my /260 recently and it wasn't even running a few minutes
> continuously before the fix). 
My 'main' mips box at home is a /260. I sometimes test things out on
a /240, but I don't have access to other boxes.
 
>  I can't comment other models.
> 
> > When I get a recent kernel running again, I would love to update my
> > DECStation Linux Website with newer instructions and a new root FS.
> 
>  I may upload binaries of my kernels to my site if they are to be useful
> -- they are fully monolithic (but with kmod support) due to historical
> reasons.  Only IPv6 is modular due to its unstability -- it freezes the
> system immediately on my /240 and splashes a bunch of suspicious messages
> on my /260 (weird, but no time to debug).  They only support /240 and /260
> due to CONFIG_CPU_HAS_WB unset.

Yes please. I hope to get a new disk this week, so I can build a
stable development server...

Thanks a lot,


-- 
Karel van Houten

----------------------------------------------------------
The box said "Requires Windows 95 or better."
I can't understand why it won't work on my Linux computer. 
----------------------------------------------------------



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