hpoj-devel

[hpoj-devel] [Patch] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[Burkhard K. <bu...@bu...>]

Hello everyone,

this patch is intended to make hpoj run under 2.4 kernel versions.
It removes a bug from the mlc_sendmsg call in ieee12844.c module,
which prevented a successfull write to the hpoj device,
fixes the layout of the mlc_proto_ops structure in ieee12844pp,
replaces the start/end_bh_atomic primitives to allow for use of=20
their 2.4 counterparts and sets the __SMP__ define depending=20
on the setting in /usr/include/linux/config.h so it is in alingment
with the kernel configuration in /usr/src/linux.=20

I you want to force an particular __SMP__ setting independantly
of any kernel configuration, you have to edit the Makefile
in ieee hpoj-0.6/ieee12844 and uncomment on of the FORCE_SMP
line at top of the file.

I'd like to ask everybody with a 2.4 kernel to test this code and
report succes or failure to this list.

Burkhard
--=20
Burkhard Kohl=09=09=09buk at/auf buks.ipn.de

[hpoj-devel] Re:[Patch v2] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[damcha <da...@cy...>]

Here is the patch which includes both Burkhard's and mine.
It now compile on 2.4.0-test9. Please report comments in the ML.


On dim, 24 sep 2000 17:12:18 Burkhard Kohl wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> this patch is intended to make hpoj run under 2.4 kernel versions.
> It removes a bug from the mlc_sendmsg call in ieee12844.c module,
> which prevented a successfull write to the hpoj device,
> fixes the layout of the mlc_proto_ops structure in ieee12844pp,
> replaces the start/end_bh_atomic primitives to allow for use of 
> their 2.4 counterparts and sets the __SMP__ define depending 
> on the setting in /usr/include/linux/config.h so it is in alingment
> with the kernel configuration in /usr/src/linux. 
> 
> I you want to force an particular __SMP__ setting independantly
> of any kernel configuration, you have to edit the Makefile
> in ieee hpoj-0.6/ieee12844 and uncomment on of the FORCE_SMP
> line at top of the file.
> 
> I'd like to ask everybody with a 2.4 kernel to test this code and
> report succes or failure to this list.
> 
> Burkhard

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS d--(+) s: a-- C++ UL+++ P+>++ L+++ E(+) W++ N+ o? K- w-- O? M V?
PS++ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5 X++ R(+) tv-(+) b+ DI D++ G e+++ h--- r++ y+++*
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
					 See http://www.geekcode.com

Re: [hpoj-devel] Re:[Patch v2] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[Burkhard K. <bu...@bu...>]

damcha wrote:
> Here is the patch which includes both Burkhard's and mine.
> It now compile on 2.4.0-test9. Please report comments in the ML.
> 

I am afraid, but I have to correct my own patch. Although it now
runs, I made an ugly typo and did not get the while-loop right in 
in mlc_recvmsg(). Damcha, would you incorporate my corrections
into your patch? Is it o.k. for you to maintain the kernel
module part of the project? I will send you my corrections with a
separate mail.

I am still concerned about the msghdr flag issue, which I don't
fully understand. 
With the 2.4 kernel we see an MSG_EOR flag set. Does that mean
we have to hand this flag further on to the next layer or does
it mean we are expected to perform some additional action.
As I noticed from Alan Cox comments in socket.[ch] not all
flags which are defined in IEEE1003.1 are implemented, but
later kernel versions might change that. 
Some flags obviously correspond to some service or type 
of service. If these flags are set and we have not implemented
this type of service, what is the correct behaviour.? Just
return with -EOPNOTSUPP? Or might it be appropriate to 
silently ignore some flags? 
O
I have to admit, that I don't know much about sockets and
their represation within the kernel. 

Furthermore I am wondering about the correct handling of the
DONTWAIT flag. nonblock is set to 0 unconditionally, but 
obviously we should accept this flag. On the other hand 
what sense does it make to accept a flag and ignore it?
On the other hand I have never seen the DONTWAIT flag being
set, does it mean, we can savely reject it?

Burkhard
-- 
Burkhard Kohl			Tel/FAX: +49 30 698 15 905
Melchiorstr. 8			bu...@bu...
10179 Berlin			

[hpoj-devel] Re:[Patch v2] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[Alexander Z. <Ale...@fm...>]

Hello,

On 25 Sep, damcha wrote:
> Here is the patch which includes both Burkhard's and mine.
> It now compile on 2.4.0-test9. Please report comments in the ML.
> 

I applied this patch to hpoj-0.6, but still have problems:

1) 2.2.16-UP
   works fine (but only on one CPU).

2) 2.2.16-SMP
   kernel still crashes during  hpo devid  .

3) 2.4.0-SMP
   kernel modules compile, but there're unresolved symbols when loading
   them and I don't know which module to install instead of
   parport_probe.

Any help wellcome!

Of course I'm able and willing to make some tests if someone tells me
what and how.
-- 
Ale...@fm... / Seize the day, put no trust in 
http://www.fmi.uni-passau.de/~zimmerma/ the morrow!   -- Quintus
for PGP public key finger            / Horatius Flaccus (Horace) 
zim...@yo...     / 

Re: [hpoj-devel] Re:[Patch v2] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[damcha <da...@cy...>]

Hello,

On lun, 02 oct 2000 16:42:44 Alexander Zimmermann wrote:
> 3) 2.4.0-SMP
>    kernel modules compile, but there're unresolved symbols when loading
>    them and I don't know which module to install instead of
>    parport_probe.


Could you list the symbols which are not resolved ?

Damcha
-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS d--(+) s: a-- C++ UL+++ P+>++ L+++ E(+) W++ N+ o? K- w-- O? M V?
PS++ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5 X++ R(+) tv-(+) b+ DI D++ G e+++ h--- r++ y+++*
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
					 See http://www.geekcode.com

Re: [hpoj-devel] Re:[Patch v2] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[Alexander Z. <Ale...@fm...>]

On  2 Oct, damcha wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On lun, 02 oct 2000 16:42:44 Alexander Zimmermann wrote:
>> 3) 2.4.0-SMP
>>    kernel modules compile, but there're unresolved symbols when loading
>>    them and I don't know which module to install instead of
>>    parport_probe.
> 
> 
> Could you list the symbols which are not resolved ?
> 
These

ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol skb_over_panic_R__ver_skb_over_panic
ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol sk_alloc_R__ver_sk_alloc
ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol sock_register_R__ver_sock_register
ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol alloc_skb_R__ver_alloc_skb
ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol irq_stat_R__ver_irq_stat
ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol __kfree_skb_R__ver___kfree_skb
ieee12844.o: unresolved symbol sk_free_R__ver_sk_free


-- 
Ale...@fm... / QOTD:  If you're looking for
http://www.fmi.uni-passau.de/~zimmerma/ trouble, I can offer you a wide 
for PGP public key finger            / selection. 
zim...@yo...     / 

Re: [hpoj-devel] Re:[Patch v2] hpoj now running with 2.4 kernel

[Burkhard K. <bu...@bu...>]

Alexander Zimmermann
> Hello,
> 
> 3) 2.4.0-SMP
>    kernel modules compile, but there're unresolved symbols when loading
>    them and I don't know which module to install instead of
>    parport_probe.
With 2.4 kernels the probe function went into the lowlevel parport
module (i.e. parport_pc). The parport_probe module no longer exists.
At the moment the modules have to be loaded by hand. I hope this will 
be resolved with the use of the new parport_register_driver interface.
For now you have to load parport, parport_pc, ieee12844 and ieee12844pp
manually - using this sequence.

Burkhard
-- 
Burkhard Kohl			bu...@bu...