Merge 8xx to Linus tree?

[Pantelis Antoniou]

Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

>>Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:53:49PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Is it not time to merge 8xx from linuxppc-2.5 into Linus tree?
>>>>>
>>>>>I know the 8xx is not fully functional yet but this isn't done
>>>>>soon I think it won't happen at all. The 8xx arch can be made to 
>>>>>depend on BROKEN in Linus tree to make it clear that it isn't
>>>>>working properly yet.
>>>>>     
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I've been the hard-ass about holding back on moving 8xx forward.  Once
>>>>2.6.9 finally comes out (assuming and hoping that Linus really intends
>>>>to do a release and not -rc5), I'll start moving stuff over and make it
>>>>depend on BROKEN hopefully in time for 2.6.10-rc1.
>>>>
>>>>-- 
>>>>Tom Rini
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Any progress?
>>>
>>>Jocke
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>>>Linuxppc-embedded at ozlabs.org
>>>https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>I'm currently battling to make 2.6.10-rc1 work the same way it used do.
>>
>>But something changed in slab management and the kmallocs in request_irq
>>called by init_IRQ fails.
>>
>
>hmm, I think I saw something about that in the www log for Linus kernel. It is offline so
>I can't check now.
>
>The www I/F for both Linus tree(http://linux.bitkeeper.com/) and the ppc tree(http://ppc.bitkeeper.com/)
>are offline alot. Anyone who knows whats going on?
>
> Jocke
>
>
>
Found the bug.

IRQ code is now common for all arches, but ppc used a special
irq_kmalloc routine, since request irq was called very early.

The generic code just calls straight kmalloc, which obviously craps out 
when too early.

Lets see what can I do to fix it...

BTW I'm curious if any embedded PPC actually works on 2.6.10...

Regards

Pantelis