On 2006-03-26 tsutsui@ceres.dti.ne.jp wrote:
> In article <Pine.BSF.4.51.0603251955370.34152@vegeta.city-net.com>
> darkstar@city-net.com wrote:
> > My
> > understanding is that the tripad hardware layout is identical to the
> > C-1000 internally, however I don't have one.
>
> Could anyone confirm this?
> If not, I'll change only lines for tripad for now.

  I found that revision 1.52 of GENERIC includes the comment by takemura:
"Note: CLIO C-1000 is identical with SHARP Tripad PV6000."

> > > > allows use of dbsym,
> > >
> > > I'm not familiar with hpcmips, but doesn't pbsdboot load
> > > symbol table? If so, shouldn't we check if bootinfo is
> > > processed properly first rather than just using dbsym(8)?
> >
> >   It doesn't work.  I don't have any way of building pbsdboot so I didn't
> > look at why.  I sent port-hpcmips/26426 about this and included this patch
> > as a workaround.  The patch uses the loaded symbols if present (if
> > pbsdboot is set to load symbols then dbsym will not work and the symbol
> > loading does not work either).
>
> dbsym(8) is just a workaround for ports which don't have native
> bootloader that can load symbols. If it doens't work, why don't
> you try to fix it rather than hide it by ugly workaround? ;-p
>
> At least you could confirm if bootinfo is passed correctly or not
> by options DEBUG, and maybe you should mention what version of
> pbsdboot or hpcboot you use. Even if you still want to use dbsym(8),
> it should be wrapped by #ifdef SYMTAB_SPACE.

  RTC_OFFSET and boot -d work, so bootinfo is being passed correctly.  I
can't find any version info in pbsdboot.exe, but I am fairly sure I
updated it when I installed a new system two years ago and the binary has
not changed in over four years.  The hpcboot I tried is most likely not
the latest, although that binary is fairly old also.  Since dbsym works
and I can't build pbsdboot I am not going to look into it more.  I don't
care if it gets commited or not, although it seems reasonable to me to
allow it.  The config changes and keymap are the important ones.

> According to VR4111 and VR4121 manuals, they have completely
> differnt pipeline structures (see chapter 5 VR41[12]1 pipeline).
> I don't think there is any possible overlooking around
> figures of pipeline activities (figure 5-3 in VR4111 manual
> and figure 5-5 in VR4121 one), so I'll leave this part.

  Yeah, it was stupid of me to blame the manual.  The add isn't available
right away for the test, so it slips.

Matthew Orgass
darkstar@city-net.com