Re: 2.4 critical compiling error in softirq.c with gcc 4.3

Hello,

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 22:33:01 +0100 (CET)
Ivan Vucica <ivucica_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Cheers,
>
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:21:15 +0100 (CET)
> > Ivan Vucica <ivucica_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Since h3800 is not supported with 2.6 kernels (almost no drivers
> >> were ported)
> >
> > That's not true.
>
> Pretty true. MMC for starters. Observe, asic1_mmc.c is a copypaste
> from 2.4 (at least it was last time I checked, few weeks ago). If
> something changed, I'll be extremely glad to use 2.6 instead.

That only means that it needs to be fixed for 2.6.

>
> And asic1_mmc.c is not alone.
>
> I had some free_time/day few months ago, but as time passes, I have
> less and less of that.

That means that h3800 port will die.

> So, although I have tried in many ways to:
> a) find a mentor to help me hack the kernel

If you'll have patches, we'll be able to suggest you on them. But the
kernel itself is the best own mentor, albeit silent. But if you will
watch carefully its signs, in a mere month you'll be able to do what
you need.

> b) try to _contact_ several members of h3800 porting team to assist me
> by providing docs and/or mentorship

There's no such porting team currently. You will head it if you start.

>
> Under b) I mean Jamey Hicks and Andrew Christian. I even went through
> other people to do so (George France). George said he'll give my mail
> to Andrew, but it's been a more than three months since he said that.
> Since my last poke, it's been about a month.

Those people are project alumni. Without new people coming, the work
they started grows unmaintained, withers, and becomes fossils. That's
very sad, and we (and I personally) did lot to save *everything*
possible. Well, now it's better to face the sad fact.

>
> Although, even if Andrew or Jamey by some wonder responded now, the
> free_time/day has in the meantime vanished, so I probably won't be
> working on porting h3800 to 2.6.
>
> >
> >> I'm stuck with 2.4 which doesn't appear to compile with
> >> today's compilers.
> >
> > 2.4 doesn't even exist per some of definitions of what "exist"
> > means.
>
> Hm, I'm feeling rather stupid right now. But I'll ask it anyway:
> What did you mean? Doesn't exist? Eh?

I mean something like: 2.4 is a dinosaur and it exists in the same
sense as dinosaurs exist. Obviously, this is my personal, highly
orthodox opinion. If 2.4 works for you, nice. If it doesn't, and you
want to "fix it", per the same highly personal and orthodox opinion,
that's waste of time, which could be invested into 2.6 instead.
Obviously, only you decide on what to do.

>
> >
> >> Or, the "current" CVS has holes like Swiss cheese.
> >>
> >> Hints? Fixes?
> >
> > No, patches. Welcome. ;-)
>
> Well, if I knew what's the problem, I wouldn't be reporting a bug,
> I'd send a patch immediately. But since I don't know what's the
> problem ... :)
>
>
> Additionally, check the other post, I've tried with 4.3, 4.2, 4.1
> with EABI, Sourcery 3.4 with EABI, and finally Handhelds 3.4.1 with
> (it appears) no EABI.
>
> Either softirq.c or cpufreq.c screws something up.
> ------------
> Ivan Vucica

-- 
Best regards,
 Paul                          mailto:pmiscml_at_gmail.com