Subject: devel-digest V2 #227
From: [email-masked] (devel-digest)
To: [email-masked]

devel-digest          Sunday, August 29 1999          Volume 02 : Number 227

In this issue:

    Re: postgresql-6.5.1 
    netwinder oddness
    Re: netwinder oddness
    Re: netwinder oddness
    Re: netwinder oddness
    Re: postgresql-6.5.1
    JVM Status, JDBC
    Re: netwinder oddness
    Re: netwinder oddness
    Secrecy, missing NeTTrom?
    Re: netwinder oddness
    Re: netwinder oddness

See the end of this digest for information about devel-digest.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 01:06:46 +0100
From: Philip Blundell <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: postgresql-6.5.1 

Chris Besignano <[email-masked]> wrote:

>I am trying to get postgresql-6.5.1 to compile on my Netwinder DM [Build
>15]. I get the following message when compiling using both the generic
>and linux_i386 templates. Postgesql seems to run on alot of platforms
>already so I don't think it will need much to get running on the
>Netwinder. I am looking for some guidance as to where I should be
>looking for this problem. What is /usr/share/misc/bison.simple ???
>
>gmake -C parser all 
>gmake[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/pgsql/src/backend/parser'
>gcc -I../../include -I../../backend   -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes
>-I.. -Wno-e
>rror   -c gram.c -o gram.o
>/usr/share/misc/bison.simple: In function `yyparse':
>/usr/share/misc/bison.simple:327: warning: implicit declaration of
>function `yyerror'
>/usr/share/misc/bison.simple:387: warning: implicit declaration of
>function `yylex'
>/tmp/ccEEdHRb.s: Assembler messages:
>/tmp/ccEEdHRb.s:52688: Error: bad immediate value for offset
>(-1073743124)
>/tmp/ccEEdHRb.s:52688: Error: bad immediate value for offset
>(-1073743124)

This looks like a compiler bug.  I don't remember having come across it 
before, offhand, but it doesn't occur on my machine here so I imagine it is 
fixed in the latest version.  The linux_i386 template is the right one to use; 
the "generic" one probably won't work.

The file /usr/share/misc/bison.simple is a bit of boilerplate that is included 
in all Bison parsers.  The warnings it generates are harmless and you can 
ignore them.

p.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 23:27:07 -0700
From: "Eric A. Perlman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: netwinder oddness

For about the last month my Netwinder has been nothing but a
glorifiedterminal, all it was used for was ssh and xaudio.  This was
mainly because 50% of programs (such as X) would do odd things, such as
running into memory violations.

Well, I finally got another unix box in the house and decided to do a
netboot and wipe my 'winder clean.  I did so, and installed andrewm's
based+many RPMS  (yes, I know its bleeding edge, but I was soo sick of
Build 12!).  Unfortunately, not all is going well.  The release, in
general, seems nice, however the frequency of memory violations I am
running into is almost tenfold.  Doh! :-(

Are there any other "releases" more modern than Build 12 to try?

Also, somewhat unrelated, is there an version of xaudio that will work
under glibc 2.9?

- -eric

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 10:16:28 -0400
From: "Andrew E. Mileski" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

"Eric A. Perlman" wrote:
> 
> Are there any other "releases" more modern than Build 12 to try?

Try build 14.  It is big, but all the pieces work fairly well except X.
For X, you need a new version of XFree and glibc.  Still lots of odd
behaviour, but that is the dangers of the edge.

> Also, somewhat unrelated, is there an version of xaudio that will work
> under glibc 2.9?

*shrug* Dunno.  Good question.

- --
Andrew E. Mileski - Software Engineer
Rebel.com  http://www.rebel.com/

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 08:35:31 -0700
From: "Eric A. Perlman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

"Andrew E. Mileski" wrote:

> Try build 14.  It is big, but all the pieces work fairly well except X.
> For X, you need a new version of XFree and glibc.  Still lots of odd
> behaviour, but that is the dangers of the edge.

I am now running Build 14, with douglasp's X (the one I used last fall)
without a problem.  Yay!  Things don' seem to be crashing, either...

On the other hand, I am _still_ getting thousands of:

PCI: parity error data parity error pc=[<02032BOC]

in my dmesg. I've been getting these ever since my netwinder came out of
the box.  Is this a harmful error?

- -eric

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 11:48:24 -0400
From: Ralph Siemsen <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

"Eric A. Perlman" wrote:

> PCI: parity error data parity error pc=[<02032BOC]
> 
> in my dmesg. I've been getting these ever since my netwinder came out of
> the box.  Is this a harmful error?

No, it appears to be a harmless (but legitimate) message.  When reading
certain status registers from the CyberPro (the video chip), it
sometimes happens that one of the values changes while the data
transaction is happening across the PCI bus.  In other words the outputs
from the video chip are not latched, they are "live".  It takes a clock
cycle before the parity bit "catches up", but if the bus cycle is
already finished, it gets reported as a parity error.  This is what you
are seeing in the logs.

We hope to find a solution (other than to disable parity checking) to
avoid all the messages.

- -- 
Ralph Siemsen -- [email-masked]

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:38:52 -0400
From: Ralph Siemsen <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: postgresql-6.5.1

Chris Besignano wrote:

> gmake -C parser all
> gmake[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/pgsql/src/backend/parser'
> gcc -I../../include -I../../backend   -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes
> -I.. -Wno-e

Try changing the optimization level (or turn it off) and see if this
helps... looks like the compiler is generating faulty assembly... Check
the makefile and/or rpm options file.

- -- 
Ralph Siemsen -- [email-masked]

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 13:18:10 -0400
From: Matthew Hately <[email-masked]>
Subject: JVM Status, JDBC

What's the status of the Java VM on the Netwinder? Also, what databases
are currently ported? And lastly, does anyone know of a good JDBC driver
for Linux?

Thanks,

Matt Hately
[email-masked]
Macadamian Technologies - http://www.macadamian.com

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 20:28:09 -0500
From: "Ivan R. Judson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

I too have recovered the franken-winder from the dead, however now that I
have installed DM 14, I am still getting many many many memory violations.
Any ideas?

- --Ivan

PS -- How would I know if I got the correct DM 14?

Eric A. Perlman <[email-masked]> wrote in message
news:[email-masked]...
>
>
> "Andrew E. Mileski" wrote:
>
> > Try build 14.  It is big, but all the pieces work fairly well except X.
> > For X, you need a new version of XFree and glibc.  Still lots of odd
> > behaviour, but that is the dangers of the edge.
>
> I am now running Build 14, with douglasp's X (the one I used last fall)
> without a problem.  Yay!  Things don' seem to be crashing, either...
>
> On the other hand, I am _still_ getting thousands of:
>
> PCI: parity error data parity error pc=[<02032BOC]
>
> in my dmesg. I've been getting these ever since my netwinder came out of
> the box.  Is this a harmful error?
>
> -eric
>

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:19:36 -0400
From: Ralph Siemsen <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

"Ivan R. Judson" wrote:
> 
> I too have recovered the franken-winder from the dead, however now that I
> have installed DM 14, I am still getting many many many memory violations.
> Any ideas?

A number of the faults have the interesting property that the PC is
equal to the "bad address" numerically... it seems that faults are being
generated in this condition even though there isn't anything wrong. 
Speculation on the arm-linux mailing list is that this could be another
StrongARM bug.

Other faults, where the PC and bad address values differ, are probably
"legitimate" errors.

- -- 
Ralph Siemsen -- [email-masked]

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 12:30:18 -0400
From: Adam C Powell IV <[email-masked]>
Subject: Secrecy, missing NeTTrom?

Greetings,

First of all, why is this project so secretive?  Why do you
password-protect everything, from newsgroups to web pages?  In all of
the open-source projects I have used or contributed to, from Debian
(PPC, Alpha and now Intel, maybe soon ARM) to RedHat to GNOME to Mozilla
to Enlightenment, has had all of their documentation and archives wide
open, and clear and open means of subscribing to email lists (in fact,
linux-kernel allows non-subscribers to post, but this has caused them
some trouble, so I can't expect others to do the same).  Is there some
reason why Netwinder has to be so much more secretive?

I'd like to make three suggestions on this, and then move on to my main
question.  The first suggestion is that you open everything, all of the
newsgroup archives, all of the development webpages, to the whole
world.  If this is unacceptable, then every Netwinder- or at the very
least every DM- should come with a pre-assigned username and password,
so at the very least machine owners have some way of getting into the
web and news servers.  Barring this, please make it MUCH more clear that
registration is necessary to access these resources.  As it is, the
"become a registered developer" on the homepage looks more like a
guestbook invitation than a necessary step to view documentation and
archives.  And the lack of any mention of this on the Discussions page
is absurd.  Thanks to these policies and omissions my system
configuration activity has been delayed by more than a week, and with
course teaching obligations approaching imminently, this was a delay
I could not afford.  I'm upset enough that if I can't get my system
configured as I like it before classes start, this Netwinder is going
back to Rebel.com and I will never come near another again.

Okay, end of rant.

Moving on, where can I get a new NeTTrom to flash?  I've installed the
Debian base in the empty partition but can't boot.  I'm using
instructions from ftp://ftp.jimpick.com/pub/debian/arm/README.Install,
which links to http://www.netwinder.org/devel/notes/sanm.html which
hasn't been updated since last December, and points to NeTTrom-2.0.4.bin
which doesn't exist, nor does recovery.img.  So where can I get these
files?  Or more recent documentation?

Thank you in advance, I look forward to using this new machine, and hope
I don't have to send it back.  We'll see.

Sincerely,

Adam Powell
Assistant Professor of Materials Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

- ---
This message processed by the Netwinder.Org news2mail gateway.

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 18:49:54 +0100 (BST)
From: Russell King <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

Ralph Siemsen writes:
> A number of the faults have the interesting property that the PC is
> equal to the "bad address" numerically... it seems that faults are being
> generated in this condition even though there isn't anything wrong. 
> Speculation on the arm-linux mailing list is that this could be another
> StrongARM bug.

This is indeed what the belief is.  Simply ignoring the data aborts
which occur with PC equal to the data (which should cause a prefetch
abort) does appear to cause no other side effects.
   _____
  |_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
  |   |         Russell King        [email-masked]      --- ---
  | | | |   http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/~rmk/aboutme.html    /  /  |
  | +-+-+                                                     --- -+-
  /   |               THE developer of ARM Linux              |+| /|\
 /  | | |                                                     ---  |
    +-+-+ -------------------------------------------------  /\\\  |
- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:43:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: netwinder oddness

On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Russell King wrote:

> Ralph Siemsen writes:
> > A number of the faults have the interesting property that the PC is
> > equal to the "bad address" numerically... it seems that faults are being
> > generated in this condition even though there isn't anything wrong. 
> > Speculation on the arm-linux mailing list is that this could be another
> > StrongARM bug.
> 
> This is indeed what the belief is.  Simply ignoring the data aborts
> which occur with PC equal to the data (which should cause a prefetch
> abort) does appear to cause no other side effects.

I discovered this problem on our SA1100 board about 3 months ago.
Recently the empeg guys hit the same problem which confirmed that I wasn't
alone with it.  Since then I though it was a SA1100 problem only.  But now
the SA110 too...

The following workaround worked flawlessly for us for three months now:

- --- ../2.2.10-rmk2_o/linux/arch/arm/mm/fault-common.c   Sun Jul  4
19:21:28 1999
+++ linux/arch/arm/mm/fault-common.c    Sun Jul  4 20:34:05 1999
@@ -151,6 +151,20 @@

        /* User mode accesses just cause a SIGSEGV */
        if (mode & FAULT_CODE_USER) {
+               if( addr == regs->ARM_pc && !READ_FAULT(mode) ) {
+                       /* there is a (still unknown) case where the CPU
+                        * triggers a fault on store instructions where
+                        * it shouldn't be because the reported bad addr
+                        * is equal to the pc address but registers used
+                        * for the store have nothing to do with the pc
+                        * value.  Seems like a CPU bug...  Simply
+                        * ignoring the fault will resume execution.
+                        * However we may loop here indefinitely if there
+                        * is a real fault.
+                        */
+                       printk("do_page_fault(): CPU bug (pc = bad 
adr), ignored\n");
+                       return;
+               }
                tsk->tss.error_code = mode;
                tsk->tss.trap_no = 14;
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_USER

Nicolas Pitre, B. ing.
[email-masked]

- --
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel" as the body of your message.

------------------------------

End of devel-digest V2 #227
***************************

--
This list is run automagically by Majordomo 1.94.4
Please send email questions to [email-masked]
To UNSUBSCRIBE: email [email-masked] with
"unsubscribe devel-digest" as the body of your message.