Announcing Zgrom 0.1

[danboid]

Hi Dromede

Am I right in thinking Zgrom uses a Z-optimized SDL build? Have you uploaded the code so that I might be able to take advantage of it under Arch or other Z distros?

Thanks

[Varti]

Hi,

Google Code is unfortunately closing down, and starting from this month it is not possible to browse the source code or download any file from any project hosted there. The only operation still allowed is an automatic export to Github. I have done a search on the whole forum and zgrom seems to be the only Z-related project hosted there.

I have seen that a first import of zgrom to Github has been already done some month ago, but unfortunately the repository contans no code:

https://github.com/static-void/zgrom

It would be a pity to lose all the source code of this nice ROM... I have now contacted the author via mail (I don't know if he still visits the forum), I hope that this will be eventually sorted out.

@danboid: This might be interesting for you too for the SDL code

Varthall

[Dromede]

Greetings,

Zgrom was a long time ago. Unfortunately, i have never uploaded the source tarballs even though i meant to. And i doubt i'll find any copies on my old hard drives. I can't exactly remember if i've done any Z specific modifications to the SDL libraries. I did write iWMMXt optimised fb rotation routines that i used in Xfbdev and in most of the emulators included with ZGrom. But i think i never got them to work properly with SDL for some reason.

The framebuffer driver in ZGrom kernels was also modified. It used the internal SRAM and SDRAM for framebuffer storage. So at QVGA resolutions the entire framebuffer would fit into the internal sram. The result is a very noticeable increase in fps on most emulators. At VGA resolution, the framebuffer was split between internal SRAM and SDRAM since it wouldn't fit into internal SRAM.

[Varti]

That's bad... I hope that you'll anyway manage to find them . At least the binaries can still be downloaded from the repository, although they might disappear at any moment without notice. I have downloaded them. It might be a good idea to store them in a public file repository, if you agree that is  Together maybe with other Z ROMs, so that they won't get lost.

Thanks anyway for the answer.

Varthall

[greguu]

Greetings,

Zgrom was a long time ago. Unfortunately, i have never uploaded the source tarballs even though i meant to. And i doubt i'll find any copies on my old hard drives. I can't exactly remember if i've done any Z specific modifications to the SDL libraries. I did write iWMMXt optimised fb rotation routines that i used in Xfbdev and in most of the emulators included with ZGrom. But i think i never got them to work properly with SDL for some reason.

The framebuffer driver in ZGrom kernels was also modified. It used the internal SRAM and SDRAM for framebuffer storage. So at QVGA resolutions the entire framebuffer would fit into the internal sram. The result is a very noticeable increase in fps on most emulators. At VGA resolution, the framebuffer was split between internal SRAM and SDRAM since it wouldn't fit into internal SRAM.

Dromede:

I would be very much interested in the framebuffer patches for SRAM and iWMMXt rotation. Have a look if you can find any, even if for 2.6 kernels. Thanks!

[zaurusrex]

Hello, Does anyone possibly have a link to the pre-compiled kexecboot-kernel 3.2 for Zaurus SL-C1000, 3100 or 3200?

Thank you in advance!

[Varti]

Hello, Does anyone possibly have a link to the pre-compiled kexecboot-kernel 3.2 for Zaurus SL-C1000, 3100 or 3200?

Are you referring to these kernels?

https://web.archive.org/web/20120615193033/...ot.org/download

I'm also interested in those images, I have now asked on the #kexecboot channel, hopefully someone will help me, I will let you know. EDIT: no answer on the channel, unfortunately

BTW what is the difference between this version of kexecboot and the one on the Arch Linux page (https://github.com/greguu/linux-4.2.3-c3x00/releases), apart from the fact that the latter is officially only for 3x00 models?

Varthall

[zaurusrex]

Yes, thank you much for the link and for asking on the channel. I'm sorry, I don't know what the difference is between Arch Linux version and the original compiled image. But I will try it.

I found some trouble booting Zgrom from the older kexecboot-2.6.2x which is located here.

[Varti]

I found some trouble booting Zgrom from the older kexecboot-2.6.2x which is located here.

Ah, thanks for this info, I was about to flash that same version! What was the problem with the boot?

I'll try the Arch version then, as well. BTW I have found a site with newer kexecboot versions, though again without the final 3.1 one:

http://www.penguin.cz/~utx/zaurus/feed/images/

These builds have been mentioned here, by one of the kexecboot devs:

http://logs.nslu2-linux.org/livelogs/kexec...ot.20150829.txt

The latest versions seem to be zImage-3.1.0-rc1+-spitz.bin (for the C3000) and zImage-3.1.0-rc1+-akita.bin (for the C1000), you might want to give them a try too.

Varthall

[zaurusrex]

The Zgrom could not successfully boot with the earlier 2.6.2x image. It made a blank screen. I will check again.

Also, thank you for posting the links to other builds.

[Varti]

I have met Ant on #kexecboot, and he told me about the current situation of kexecboot (see also my post here: https://www.oesf.org/forum/index.php?s=&...t&p=282292). He told me that, unfortunately, the 3.2 prebuilt images are lost.
This image had anyway problems on some models (poodle and especially collie).

The reason why the 2.6.xx images (and the later ones, including the 3.2 one) fail to boot zgrom is because they use the old boot.img syntax, so a newer image is required. My guess is that, when zgrom was released, a kexecboot based on a kernel newer than 3.2 was available, and that might have been required for zgrom.

Arch Linux' kexecboot is based on 3.5, so zgrom should work with it.

Varthall

[zaurusrex]

I have met Ant on #kexecboot, and he told me about the current situation of kexecboot (see also my post here: https://www.oesf.org/forum/index.php?s=&...t&p=282292). He told me that, unfortunately, the 3.2 prebuilt images are lost.
This image had anyway problems on some models (poodle and especially collie).

The reason why the 2.6.xx images (and the later ones, including the 3.2 one) fail to boot zgrom is because they use the old boot.img syntax, so a newer image is required. My guess is that, when zgrom was released, a kexecboot based on a kernel newer than 3.2 was available, and that might have been required for zgrom.

Arch Linux' kexecboot is based on 3.5, so zgrom should work with it.

Varthall

I see, that is good news! It is exciting to hear Ant is still working to a refreshed kernel. Thank you again for the pleasant information for kexecboot progress!

On an added note I have not tried the Arch Linux version yet but look forward to flash the image soon.

[ArchiMark]

Just in case anyone here was wondering if OESF forums had disappearred, it has returned as you can now see.

Mark