OESF | ELSI | pdaXrom | OpenZaurus | Zaurus Themes | Community Links | Ibiblio

IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Openbsd 4.2 Beta Issues
ZDevil
post Aug 11 2007, 07:22 PM
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 2,003
Joined: 16-April 04
From: the Netherlands && /dev/null
Member No.: 2,882



I think the current 4.2 Beta deserves a separate thread for discussion.

The first issue I run into is the setting of the cpu speed in /etc/sysctl.conf.
For "machdep.maxspeed", both 520 and 450 seem not working.
I see this error message during booting:
CODE
"sysctl: machdep.maxspeed: value is not available"


But according to www.planetofidiots.com/zaurus/ 450 is supposed to work, despite that 520 is said to be unstable under the current build. What to do?

Sidenote: i've managed to set up a NFS server on my Macbook without virtualization, and my 3200 succeeds in mounting the NFS shares to build ports there. smile.gif But I am doing things a bit differently from the instructions in www.planetofidiots.com/zaurus/ . Will post a step-by-step guide soon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mathemajikian
post Aug 12 2007, 03:28 AM
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 304
Joined: 8-July 06
From: United Kingdom for now....
Member No.: 10,349



QUOTE(ZDevil @ Aug 12 2007, 03:22 AM)
The first issue I run into is the setting of the cpu speed in /etc/sysctl.conf.
For "machdep.maxspeed", both 520 and 450 seem not working.
I see this error message during booting:

CODE
"sysctl: machdep.maxspeed: value is not available"

You need to run mergemaster after you update. It seems that this sysctl option has been removed along with a few others.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZDevil
post Aug 12 2007, 06:12 PM
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 2,003
Joined: 16-April 04
From: the Netherlands && /dev/null
Member No.: 2,882



Thanks. Actually I reinstalled everything from the ground up, so there seems to be no need for mergemaster. The machdep.maxspeed and closelid.suspend functions seem to have been turned off in the current 4.2 beta (#158). Is that true?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mathemajikian
post Aug 13 2007, 01:32 AM
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 304
Joined: 8-July 06
From: United Kingdom for now....
Member No.: 10,349



QUOTE(ZDevil @ Aug 13 2007, 02:12 AM)
Thanks. Actually I reinstalled everything from the ground up, so there seems to be no need for mergemaster. The machdep.maxspeed and closelid.suspend functions seem to have been turned off in the current 4.2 beta (#158). Is that true?

This seems to be the case, but I'm not sure if it's just a beta change or something which will be more permanent.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZDevil
post Aug 13 2007, 01:48 AM
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 2,003
Joined: 16-April 04
From: the Netherlands && /dev/null
Member No.: 2,882



I see. Thanks...
Well, that doesn't really hurt, as now I am rebuilding the packages for 4.2 with optimization, which can make up for the lack of (over)clocking. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
iamasmith
post Aug 13 2007, 06:23 AM
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 6-July 04
Member No.: 3,928



http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-arm&m=118701458824485&w=2

^^ -Andy

Attached File  sys_arch_arm_include_cpu_h_fix_machdeps.patch.txt ( 699bytes ) Number of downloads: 16
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZDevil
post Aug 13 2007, 06:49 AM
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 2,003
Joined: 16-April 04
From: the Netherlands && /dev/null
Member No.: 2,882



Thanks, Andy. So will this patch be used for the next snapshot? smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
iamasmith
post Aug 13 2007, 07:05 AM
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 6-July 04
Member No.: 3,928



QUOTE(ZDevil @ Aug 13 2007, 02:49 PM)
Thanks, Andy. So will this patch be used for the next snapshot? smile.gif
*


Who knows, they have ignored patches I sent before. I have to admit that Theo asked me to nag about getting my Caps Lock patches included in 4.1 but I didn't have time to chase the submitters.

Hopefully this will be seen as an easy submission and won't even touch the sides tongue.gif

-Andy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
iamasmith
post Aug 13 2007, 07:25 AM
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 6-July 04
Member No.: 3,928



Actually, Miod just responded and said that the way that I am handling the change isn't correct in terms of how the MIB is treated (numbers shouldn't be reassigned). I will issue another patch when I have tested.

Regards,

-Andy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mathemajikian
post Aug 13 2007, 11:43 AM
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 304
Joined: 8-July 06
From: United Kingdom for now....
Member No.: 10,349



QUOTE(iamasmith @ Aug 13 2007, 03:25 PM)
Actually, Miod just responded and said that the way that I am handling the change isn't correct in terms of how the MIB is treated (numbers shouldn't be reassigned). I will issue another patch when I have tested.

Regards,

-Andy

How else can you achieve this? I don't understand why your method is incorrect?
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/....16&r2=1.17&f=h
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
iamasmith
post Aug 13 2007, 01:28 PM
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 6-July 04
Member No.: 3,928



Well, Miod pointed out that the ordinals assigned to the sysctl mibs have to stay assigned as they originally were. I'm guessing that there may be other ways of referencing the sysctl mib tree, possibly like other mibs.. i.e. 1.22.1.33 etc. to select nodes of a mib tree. Bearing in mind that the mib may possibly be accessible through SNMP etc.

To retain the IDs I will do what Miod has suggested and put the strings back into the cpu.h section leaving the methods unimplemented, however, my source build tree is on an NFS server at work atm. so I'll kick off a test build tomorrow morning before all my meetings start tongue.gif

-Andy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mathemajikian
post Aug 13 2007, 01:53 PM
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 304
Joined: 8-July 06
From: United Kingdom for now....
Member No.: 10,349



QUOTE(iamasmith @ Aug 13 2007, 09:28 PM)
Well, Miod pointed out that the ordinals assigned to the sysctl mibs have to stay assigned as they originally were. I'm guessing that there may be other ways of referencing the sysctl mib tree, possibly like other mibs.. i.e. 1.22.1.33 etc. to select nodes of a mib tree. Bearing in mind that the mib may possibly be accessible through SNMP etc.

To retain the IDs I will do what Miod has suggested and put the strings back into the cpu.h section leaving the methods unimplemented, however, my source build tree is on an NFS server at work atm. so I'll kick off a test build tomorrow morning before all my meetings start tongue.gif

-Andy


Just read the OpenBSD-ARM messages. Makes sense, but won't that lead to a bit of code clutter?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
iamasmith
post Aug 14 2007, 02:53 AM
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 6-July 04
Member No.: 3,928



There are many sysctls that have been depracated and/or moved to IOCTLs so there is a certain amount of clutter but this kind of procedure is necessary to protect anybody using older mibs to ensure that the mibs don't hit the wrong values.

I have found that implementing the change in the way suggested requires a little more work since if you leave the mib without a handler the sysctl calls don't process any more of the mib tree.

I should create a handler really that says that the access mechanism for those mibs (ztsscale and ztsrawmode) is deprecated and that tools should be updated.

I will look at this when I have a little more time, one of my projects at work has kicked into overdrive though tongue.gif

-Andy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
iamasmith
post Aug 14 2007, 01:52 PM
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 6-July 04
Member No.: 3,928



Actually I got an email from robert@ saying he was on it.

So there will be a fix, from one of us.

-Andy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZDevil
post Aug 14 2007, 03:10 PM
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 2,003
Joined: 16-April 04
From: the Netherlands && /dev/null
Member No.: 2,882



Thanks! Looking forward to that. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th October 2014 - 07:28 AM