Forum Discussion
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor
Honored Contributorlinux 2.6.12 instability
hippo, I'm starting a new thread to keep track of this...
I think 2.6.12 looks better than .16 - it hasn't failed on me yet. the patches you gave me were a bit messy though, I think maybe some things were missing. I also get these warnings on every single file compiled: In file included from /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/sched.h:17, from /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/module.h:10, from /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/init/version.c:10: /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/nodemask.h: In function `__first_unset_node': /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/nodemask.h:250: warning: passing arg 1 of `find_next_zero_bit' discards qualifiers from pointer target type Page allocation failures is one thing, but I'm more worried about the kernel hanging completely like .16 was doing. I also have a feeling it's the busybox version. I noticed that in 1.1.1, the file utilities were a bit messed up. For example, here is the output from a normal 'df -h': # busybox_old df -h Filesystem Size Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/ram0 235.0k 14.0k 221.0k 6% /var /dev/ram1 235.0k 13.0k 222.0k 6% /tmp /dev/hda1 14.5M 12.3M 1.5M 89% /mnt/cf# Here is the output of 1.1.1 df -h: # df -h Filesystem Size Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/ram0 235.0k 14.0k 221.0k 6% (null) /dev/ram1 235.0k 13.0k 222.0k 6% (null) /dev/hda1 14.5M 12.3M 1.5M 89% (null)# All the filesystem utilities, like mke2fs, du, e2fsck, are weird like this. I will keep playing around with 2.6.12 and see what happens.26 Replies
Altera_Forumhippo, I was just starting on 2.6.16, and I was wondering how come the uClinux patch for 2.6.16 is MUCH smaller than 2.6.14 (4K vs. 120K)?
- Altera_Forum--- Quote Start --- originally posted by jdhar@Apr 14 2006, 06:08 AM hippo, i was just starting on 2.6.16, and i was wondering how come the uclinux patch for 2.6.16 is much smaller than 2.6.14 (4k vs. 120k)?
<div align='right'><{post_snapback}> (index.php?act=findpost&pid=14349)
--- quote end ---
--- Quote End --- sorry, I skipped 01 patch as it was before and jumped from 02 of 2.6.15 when I worked on 2.6.16 . I didn't have them in my svn of 2.6.16. Please start from 02 of 2.6.15, and find the diff of what I have in 2.6.16 . Mostly in uarts.
- Altera_Forum
It's also funny how the uClinux patches themselves are extremely small now... 2.6.15 is only a few K???
- Altera_Forum--- Quote Start --- originally posted by jdhar@Apr 14 2006, 01:27 PM it's also funny how the uclinux patches themselves are extremely small now... 2.6.15 is only a few k???
<div align='right'><{post_snapback}> (index.php?act=findpost&pid=14356)
--- quote end ---
--- Quote End --- It isn't. The uClinux patches has been merged into 2.6 main stream. So they are just some bugs fix, after each 2.6 release.
- Altera_Forum
Just verified J's 2.6.12 snapshot is OK.
* The .config defaults are not so good, but I successfully used .config from 2.6.x * The zImage stuff works :-) - Altera_Forum
I'm not too sure how to get a default .config in there other than attaching it to the archive. There has to be a way to get it into the default build.
