Re: PR 9725 and the m68k pmap

[Hauke Fath <hauke%Espresso.Rhein-Neckar.DE@localhost>]

At 22:04 Uhr +0900 12.5.2009, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
>Hauke Fath wrote:
>
>> now that netbsd-5 is safely on its way, I would like to come back to PR
>> 9725 <http://www.NetBSD.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=9725 >. As
>> mentioned a while back, the issue stands between the 68k family and
>> successful pkgsrc bulk builds.
>>
>> During a discussion last August, Izumi Tsutsui mentioned that pmap would
>> have to be re-written, while Michael Hitch hinted at some work he'd done on
>> amiga to allow for larger user address space. Can you elaborate?
>
>I have not discussed with Michael, but I think we have to know
>how current m68k pmap (both for 020/030 and 040/060) has been
>designed and implemented.
>
>I wrote the following message on port-atari when I was working
>on atari pmap, and I think they might be useful on this topic:
>http://mail-index.NetBSD.org/port-atari/2009/01/03/msg000200.html

Turns out they were cc'ed to port-m68k, and are in my mailbox...

Further reading back reveals the bug has come up quite a few times; the
first mentioning I found at

<http://mail-index.NetBSD.org/port-hp300/2000/03/oindex.html>
<http://mail-index.NetBSD.org/port-m68k/2000/03/oindex.html>

An interesting exchange (and the reason why I cc'ed Steve Woodford) is at
<http://mail-index.NetBSD.org/port-m68k/2001/07/oindex.html>, and
especially <http://mail-index.NetBSD.org/port-m68k/2001/07/21/0000.html>.
From what I see, m68k/m68k/pmap_motorola.c and sun3/sun3x/pmap.c differ
considerably. Has the latter had any influence on the merged pmap
implementation? Has there been any work to enhance the sun3x pmap with
680[46]0 support?

>(sorry for my insufficient English to mention such technical details)
>---
>Izumi Tsutsui

Oh, your English is perfectly clear to me. It's the technical details that
I am struggling with.  :)

        hauke


--
"It's never straight up and down"     (DEVO)