Re: ICH patch for testing

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 09:21:23PM +0100, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> With your patch, "shutdown -r" still works but "shutdown -p" hangs at:
> acpi: entering state 5

This is a generation for which the patch should change nothing, so are
you sure the patch is responsible for the hang?

Joerg

Re: ICH patch for testing

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 09:32:16PM +0000, Andrew Doran wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 08:52:24PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 09:21:23PM +0100, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> > > 
> > > With your patch, "shutdown -r" still works but "shutdown -p" hangs at:
> > > acpi: entering state 5
> > 
> > That certainly used to happen, believed to be because the code
> > is running on the wrong cpu.
> 
> I still see it occasionally. We could have sys_reboot kill all processor
> sets / affinity, offline all but the boot cpu at an appropriate point.
> Then a yield() and it should be running on the boot cpu.

We could do the same dance as cpu_suspend is doing via cpu_shutdown as
well.

Joerg

Re: ICH patch for testing

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 09:21:23PM +0100, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
>> With your patch, "shutdown -r" still works but "shutdown -p" hangs at:
>> acpi: entering state 5
> 
> This is a generation for which the patch should change nothing, so are
> you sure the patch is responsible for the hang?

I've had issues where sometimes it wouldn't shut down either without
this patch (on a quad-core machine), so that seems to be another issue
(perhaps related to not running the ACPI shutdown call on the BSP?).

Cheers,
--

-- 
	Thomas E. Spanjaard
	tgen <at> netphreax.net
	tgen <at> deepbone.net

Re: ICH patch for testing

On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 01:58:36PM +0000, Thomas E. Spanjaard wrote:
> I've had issues where sometimes it wouldn't shut down either without
> this patch (on a quad-core machine), so that seems to be another issue
> (perhaps related to not running the ACPI shutdown call on the BSP?).

Can you see if that problem disappears with the attached patch?

Joerg

Index: cpu.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/joerg/repo/netbsd/src/sys/arch/x86/x86/cpu.c,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -p -r1.62 cpu.c
--- cpu.c	21 Jan 2009 21:26:01 -0000	1.62
+++ cpu.c	2 Feb 2009 14:38:43 -0000
 <at>  <at>  -121,6 +121,7  <at>  <at>  __KERNEL_RCSID(0, "$NetBSD: cpu.c,v 1.62
 int     cpu_match(device_t, cfdata_t, void *);
 void    cpu_attach(device_t, device_t, void *);

+static bool	cpu_shutdown(device_t, int);
 static bool	cpu_suspend(device_t PMF_FN_PROTO);
 static bool	cpu_resume(device_t PMF_FN_PROTO);

 <at>  <at>  -420,7 +421,7  <at>  <at>  cpu_attach(device_t parent, device_t sel

 	atomic_or_32(&cpus_attached, ci->ci_cpumask);

-	if (!pmf_device_register(self, cpu_suspend, cpu_resume))

5.0_RC1 intel quadcore stuck at fdc0

hello list,

on an intel quadcore machine 5.0_RC1 with acpi enabled hangs at
"fdc at isa0 port 0x3f0-0x3f7 irq 6 drq 2".
and without acpi it hangs at  "attimer0: attached to pcppi0".
I also see that only one cpu is detected, the others
fail to become ready.
This is an ICH9 chipset.
I also tried booting without the keyboard plugged in. No success.

Whats the solution/workaround for this ?

cheers, Zafer.

Desktop NetBSD needs your help

For those new to NetBSD the early user experience can be poor. This is
especially true when coming from a Windows/Mac/Linux background. 

While basically sound, the installer asks many detailed questions and is
unintuitive. If new users persevere and install the system, they are left
with a 1980s-style text prompt, a lot of useful but unfamiliar tools, and no
way to browse the web in order to learn more. The learning curve is steep.

For more experienced users, installing a desktop to perform basic tasks like
web browsing or word processing is cumbersome. It generally involves hours
spent installing packages and editing configuration files. That can be fun
if you have nothing better to do, but most of us have busy lives.

Those are the problems, now on to the solution. Some of us have been
exchanging ideas on this topic for years, and have decided that it's time
we fixed the major problems. Hence the desktop project, the primary goal
of which is:

    Given a NetBSD CD and a reasonably modern x86 computer, make it possible
    to install a useful desktop system in under 15 minutes, responding to
    only a few prompts in the process.

We need help with this project! If you have the time, ambition, skill and
aren't afraid to get your hands dirty, then please volunteer!

If you have insight into which areas of the system are poor, or areas in
which other systems excel, let us know!

We have created a wiki page with some information about the project. There
are already some tasks, ranging from from fun stuff like progamming to less

Re: Desktop NetBSD needs your help

This sounds like an excellent idea.  Looking at the wiki, though, I'm
confused: is the goal to fix the installation or the user experience?
The latter would have to include things like patch and update
management, wireless connectivity interfaces, automount or equivalent,
etc.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

Re: Desktop NetBSD needs your help

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Doran <ad <at> netbsd.org> wrote:
> For those new to NetBSD the early user experience can be poor. This is
> especially true when coming from a Windows/Mac/Linux background.

Are we drawing any inspiration from any of the currently successful
open source OS projects? Or is this going to have a flavor all it's
own?

I'll try to add my thoughts and support from over 10 years of
experience in getting NetBSD working to some extent on the desktop. I
honestly never put much thought into this, because after spending
(wasting?) my time with numerous other operating systems, and
generally learning what is good and isn't good, I've come to
appreciate what's already here in NetBSD.

But I don't think it's a bad thing to attract new users with a slick
installer. I might even use it myself.

Andy

Re: Desktop NetBSD needs your help

>   http://wiki.netbsd.se/Desktop_Project

Why did you choose Gnome instead of KDE?

Re: Desktop NetBSD needs your help

On 2/6/2009 8:51 PM, Ernesto Bascon wrote:
>>    http://wiki.netbsd.se/Desktop_Project
>
> Why did you choose Gnome instead of KDE?

Why choose KDE instead of GNOME?