headers
Chris Tribo | 9 Jun 2003 18:37

-RS/6000


	I have a deskside RS/6000 MCA system sitting in my garage that I 
can't do anything with because it has no OS. I can offer it up for free 
to anyone who can come to Wilmington, DE, to pick it up; or make it 
available via terminal server on a very termporary basis. Either way, I 
need to have it gone before August. I think it's a model 78, but I can't 
remember. It has space for several full heigh HDs, about 8 MCA slots. Its 
probably 3 to 4 feet long, 2 feet wide and about 3 feet tall.

	If MCA support gets pulled in fron i386, is this machine going to 
need a new port or is it actually PReP or CHRP compliant?

 -- 

The nice thing about Windows is - It does not just crash, it displays a
dialog box and lets you press 'OK' first.
						-- Arno Schaefer
Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Matt Thomas | 23 Jun 2003 20:43

"G5" (IBM970) support (or lack thereof)

As you may know, Apple announces PowerMacs based on the IBM970
PPC64 cpu.  NetBSD does not support this chip since it requires
changes to the OEA pmap which I wrote.  I've made the needed
modification but have yet to test them since I can't get my
Power3 machine to stop in open firmware.

Note that the above changes where in a 64bit kernel.  To get
a 32bit kernel which support both PPC32 and PPC64 will need
further development.  I hadn't concentrated on that since the
platform I was worried about didn't need mixed kernels.

[Now if some kind soul could expedite a new G5 Mac, I have all of
next week to work on it.  Or could tell me how to get my 43P-260
to not boot AIX I'd be a happy person.  I'd prefer the former of
course.]

--

-- 
Matt Thomas               Internet:   matt <at> 3am-software.com
3am Software Foundry      WWW URL:    http://www.3am-software.com/bio/matt/
Cupertino, CA             Disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
John Klos | 23 Jun 2003 21:00

Re: "G5" (IBM970) support (or lack thereof)

Hi,

> [Now if some kind soul could expedite a new G5 Mac, I have all of
> next week to work on it.  Or could tell me how to get my 43P-260
> to not boot AIX I'd be a happy person.  I'd prefer the former of
> course.]

Might one guess that Apple's improvements to gcc would make it very
attractive for NetBSD 2.0? I believe that gcc 3.3 doesn't even build on
NetBSD ppc at the moment...

John Klos
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
M L Riechers | 23 Jun 2003 21:46

Re: "G5" (IBM970) support (or lack thereof)


On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 15:00:24 -0400 (EDT), John Klos
<john <at> sixgirls.org> entrusted usall with:

> Might one guess that Apple's improvements to gcc would make it very
> attractive for NetBSD 2.0?... 

Yes, 3.3 is very sweet, and, from what I hear, a done deal for 2.0
(but, what do I know? NGFTM).

> .... I believe that gcc 3.3 doesn't even build on
> NetBSD ppc at the moment...
> 
> John Klos

I guess. Please see latest on tech-toolchain for (almost certainly
necessary ppc) changes.  May not be _all_ that's required, tho.

The long and the short is, it worked for me, on MPC823 port, but it is
needful for TPTB to bless and add to.

Again, thanks to all who helped us.

Kind regards,

-Mike
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David Edelsohn | 24 Jun 2003 07:38
Picon
Favicon

Re: "G5" (IBM970) support (or lack thereof)

>>>>> Matt Thomas writes:

Matt> I can't get my
Matt> Power3 machine to stop in open firmware.

	Press F1 key during POST between Keyboard Icon appearing and
Speaker Icon appearing.  This will drop you into System Management from
which you can get to OpenFirmware prompt (or set boot device directly).

David
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Aymeric Vincent | 25 Jun 2003 21:21
Picon

ofwboot problems on ofppc


        Hi,

we are currently trying together with a friend to run NetBSD/ofppc
under psim.

Among the many weird things that we see, one of the easiest to fix
seems to be ofwboot.

However, the OF_seek() function in ofppc/stand/ofwboot/Locore.c takes
a u_quad_t as parameter, and can't printf() the right value it gets
passed (noticed because it passes bad values to the openfirmware).

Does it ring a bell to anyone?

I tried the following things:

- compile with -mno-multiple, with -O, with -O2, with -ffreestanding
  -> no change
- compile with no optimization -> ofwboot crashes (!)
- ofdev.c which calls OF_seek() in strategy() lacked the "openfirm.h"
#include, but even with it included, it changes nothing.

Loading the kernel directly works but fails miserably, whichever
executable we give it instead of init: e.g. :

root device: ofdisk0c
ofdisk0c
dump device (default ofdisk0b):
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jochen Roth | 25 Jun 2003 22:56
Picon
Favicon

IBM NetworkStation 1000 port

Hello everyone,

I found a couple postings regarding the NS1000 a number of weeks
ago when I was looking for more information. I tried to find
some downloadable archives of this list to avoid faq-type questions,
but I have not found anything for off-line reading yet.

I wrote the original patches for linux on the NS1000, so here is
some background on where I am at.

> Subject: Re: IBM NetStation 1000 Port
> To: Okke Wald <okke.wald <at> ki.comcity.de>
> From: John Gordon <john_94501 <at> yahoo.com>
> List: port-powerpc
> Date: 04/12/2003 00:23:53 

> There is a patch that can be applied to the stock 2.4.19 kernel available from
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/networkstation - there is very little
> documentation, but there are some posts in the forums for this project that
> explain the installation and build process, and some emails in the mailing list
> archives.

I pretty much reverse engineered the boot process using a JTAG debugger
and watchpoints on data areas, etc. Most of what I know is in the source
code patches. The single biggest problem for me has been trying to locate
some documentation on the IBM27-82376 ISA bridge. I found some snippets
in a reference design .ps for the 82660 host bridge, and that is it. So
anybody with any information on it, please email!

> I have that kernel built and booted, and it worked as far as getting to the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Andrew Brown | 26 Jun 2003 15:25

Re: ofwboot problems on ofppc

>...
>Loading the kernel directly works but fails miserably, whichever
>executable we give it instead of init: e.g. :
>
>root device: ofdisk0c
>ofdisk0c
>dump device (default ofdisk0b): 
>
>file system (default generic): 
>
>root on ofdisk0c dumps on ofdisk0b
>root file system type: cd9660
>init path (default /sbin/init): /rescue/date
>/rescue/date
>init: trying /rescue/date
>panic: init died (signal 0, exit 0)
>Stopped in pid 1.1 (date) at    0x1c9684:       lwz     r0, r1, 0x14
>db> 
>
>I suspect "init" could be passed bad arguments just because the kernel
>doesn't get them from ofwboot, and that's why I'm trying harder to
>make ofwboot work.

it might be arguments, but if you note the exit status of "init" (aka
date), it's 0.  that typically means it completed successfully.
perhaps you were expecting to see output, but you fail to realize one
of the things that makes init special.  init expects to be init and
opens /dev/console.  date doesn't do this, so any output from it is
lost.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Aymeric Vincent | 26 Jun 2003 19:13
Picon

Re: ofwboot problems on ofppc


Andrew Brown <atatat <at> atatdot.net> writes:

> it might be arguments, but if you note the exit status of "init" (aka
> date), it's 0.  that typically means it completed successfully.
> perhaps you were expecting to see output, but you fail to realize one
> of the things that makes init special.  init expects to be init and
> opens /dev/console.  date doesn't do this, so any output from it is
> lost.

You are right. BTW, it's time for an update: hardcoding the boot
parameters in the kernel allows us to boot into single-user mode
successfully (and certainly also to multi-user mode).

The only mystery that remains is why ofwboot can't pass around
u_quad_t's successfully.

Thanks,
 Aymeric
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Aymeric Vincent | 26 Jun 2003 22:57
Picon

Re: ofwboot problems on ofppc


Aymeric Vincent <Aymeric.Vincent <at> labri.fr> writes:

> The only mystery that remains is why ofwboot can't pass around
> u_quad_t's successfully.

Actually the problem was in strategy(): because it was defined in K&R
form, its daddr_t argument was passed wrong.

This is now fixed in -current by a set of patches that clean up
ofwboot a bit.

 Aymeric
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane