- l4-hackers - example.com Site

L4 SCSI driver
by dmiller 10 Jun '02

10 Jun '02

dear l4-hackers does any version of L4 have an adaptec SCSI driver? we are trying to add an adaptec 2940UW SCSI driver to the Sombrero Single Address Space OS I have taught L4 as the topic of my OS internals course (using the L4 version available from UNSW) - but can't find such a driver in that source thanks for any info you have on this don miller -- Donald S. Miller Associate Professor Computer Science and Engineering Department Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-5406 email: donald.miller(a)asu.edu http://www.eas.asu.edu/~sasos phone: (480)-965-5935 Fax: 480/965-2751

3 2

DE use
by luke.hart＠sysmedia.com 02 May '02

02 May '02

All, The latest version of L4 (from CVS) and probably earlier ones, check for the debug extensions. Does it actually use them? I ask this since Bochs, does not set the DE bit in the CPUID or support these extensions. I have done a search for usage of DRx (where x is 0-7) in the source, but couldn't find any references. Is it safe to just remove the check for DE? Thanks for any info., Luke

3 2

RE: DE use
by Volkmar Uhlig 01 May '02

01 May '02

What kernel? Hazelnut or FIASCO? > -----Original Message----- > From: luke.hart(a)sysmedia.com [mailto:luke.hart@sysmedia.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 1:42 AM > To: l4-hackers(a)os.inf.tu-dresden.de > Subject: DE use > > > All, > > The latest version of L4 (from CVS) and probably earlier > ones, check for the > debug extensions. Does it actually use them? I ask this since > Bochs, does > not set the DE bit in the CPUID or support these extensions. > > I have done a search for usage of DRx (where x is 0-7) in the > source, but > couldn't find any references. Is it safe to just remove the > check for DE?

2 1

L4 SCSI driver
by dmiller 19 Apr '02

19 Apr '02

Gernot a quick question does any version of L4 have an adaptec SCSI driver? we are trying to add an adaptec 2940UW SCSI driver to Sombrero thanks for any info you have on this don -- Donald S. Miller Associate Professor Computer Science and Engineering Department Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-5406 email: donald.miller(a)asu.edu http://www.eas.asu.edu/~sasos phone: (480)-965-5935 Fax: 480/965-2751 --

1 0

L4 for asm-free OS'es?
by William A. Gatliff 09 Apr '02

09 Apr '02

Guys: I'm an L4 newbie. I've booted it on my PC, I've read a lot of the online docs, and I've looked at some of the code. But I've been doing embedded systems for more than ten years now, so I know a thing or two about computers and operating systems. I'm interested in using L4 as a foundation for a new, yet-to-be-written Linux replacement intended primarily for use in embedded systems. My main motivations are for an OS that is portable, is understandable, has low interrupt latency, and has a small memory footprint. I'm thinking along the same lines as L4-Linux, but my OS would probably be written in C++ and make more use of L4 servers for hardware i/o. Here are my questions: One of the L4 manuals I've read says that when an OS running under L4 starts, it should take all free memory from sigma0 and then manage the pages itself. To me, this means that the OS has to know how to interact with the host CPU's MMU hardware, which is obviously hardware-dependent and therefore undesirable in a portable OS. It also appears to be redundant--- sigma0 already knows how to work the MMU. Performance issues aside, would letting sigma0 do page mapping and unmapping eliminate the need for an OS running under it to know how the MMU interface works, and thereby make the OS a little more portable? Is this a reasonable approach? What is the likelihood that an L4-based OS would need no assembly language at all, other than the syscall interface? I'm thinking along the lines of "to port this OS to your CPU, just port L4 and then recompile the OS sources." I'm eyeing ARM, MIPS, SH and x86 targets--- all of which I work with every day. I have single-board computers representing all four architectures in my lab here right now, and I'm doing something with all of them almost all the time. That's why portability is important to me. My customers think Linux is great because it's more portable than the alternatives, but I think it isn't nearly portable enough. And it scores low marks for understandability, interrupt latency and footprint. Oh, and debuggability---I love your "KD:" prompt! :^) Thanks! b.g. -- Bill Gatliff bgat(a)billgatliff.com

5 6

RE: L4 for asm-free OS'es?
by Josh English 08 Apr '02

08 Apr '02

I was told that BeOS used a similar C++ structure. Though I have no idea how it was really implemented. - Josh -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Strasser [mailto:past@sbox.tugraz.at] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 5:29 PM To: bgat(a)billgatliff.com Cc: l4ka(a)ira.uka.de; l4-hackers(a)os.inf.tu-dresden.de Subject: Re: L4 for asm-free OS'es? William A. Gatliff wrote: > A lot of what I see happening in the C parts of Linux could be done > *so* much better with C++. I'm thinking of an OO-oriented driver > model as an example, rather than just a soup of C functions that you > have to invoke in the proper order for things to work right. "Want to > right a USB driver? Well then just inherit from USBDriver and fill in > these functions for the bulk transfers." You know, like that. :^) You probaly want to have a look at MacOS X / Darwin and its IOKit. Thats exactly what they do. Patrick _______________________________________________ l4-hackers mailing list l4-hackers(a)os.inf.tu-dresden.de http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/mailman/listinfo/l4-hackers

1 0

IDL4 0.8.1 released
by Andreas Haeberlen 06 Apr '02

06 Apr '02

Hello L4 hackers, IDL4 is now available for download from the L4Ka home page. IDL4 is a stub-code generator for the L4 platform. It generates communication stubs from interface definitions written in a specification language such as CORBA IDL or DCE IDL. It also uses knowledge about the hardware platform and the microkernel to optimize the performance of the generated code. Some features: o Supports CORBA IDL (recommended) and DCE IDL o Backends available for Hazelnut and Pistachio o Client stubs use CORBA C language mapping o Type import from C/C++ code o Modular design; easily extensible For more information please visit http://l4ka.org/projects/idl4/ - Andreas --- Andreas Haeberlen System Architecture Group, University of Karlsruhe, Germany haeberlen(a)ira.uka.de, phone: +49 (721) 608-4055

1 0

Fiasco and linux22 -- RMGR: overlapping modules problem
by Ian Duggan 23 Mar '02

23 Mar '02

I'm trying to get linux22 working on the recent CVS version of fiasco. I've run into an obstacle that hopefully someone here can assist with. When my machine is booting up, I get an "overlapping modules" error that looks like this: ------------------------------------------------------- RMGR: loading /sigma0 RMGR: loading kernel /main RMGR: overlaps: 00300000-00301c78 : /main RMGR: 00100000-0015fc69 module 02: 001e6000-00345be4 : /glinux root=/dev/hdb1 init=/bin/sh overlaps, 1, mem_high = 0x09f9fc00 RMGR: overlapping modules ------------------------------------------------------- 00300000 is the starting link address of /main 00100000 is the starting link address of /rmgr I thought that maybe I needed to move the starting link address of /glinux, so I adjusted the corresponding vmlinux.lds file used for linking linux22, but there is no change in the result. I verified all code start/end addresses using objdump -d. Just now I noticed that 001e5000 is where GRUB is loading the /glinux image to. Grub shows: [Multiboot-modules @ 0x1e6000 ... when it is starting up. The problem seems to be that rmgr is calling check_inside_myself and croaking when it sees that the /glinux module overlaps it. I don't understand why the /main and /rmgr images are being loaded to their correct link locations, but /glinux is not. Is grub supposed to load things directly to the correct location, or are the modules supposed to be relocated at some point in the boot process. Any suggestions on what to look at? -- Ian ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ian Duggan ian(a)ianduggan.net http://www.ianduggan.net

4 6

Re: L4Env
by Ian Duggan 11 Mar '02

11 Mar '02

What is the latest status on the L4ENV stuff? --Ian > > Ian Duggan <ian(a)ianduggan.net> writes: > > > Where can I find out more information about the L4Env project? I'm > [...] > > presentation can be foud at > > http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/~reuther/helmuth.pdf > > http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/~reuther/helmuth_slides.pdf > > There is also a small webpage at > http://wwwos.inf.tu-dresden.de/~ch12/diplom/diplom.xml > > I will put more up-to-date documentation (doxygen) about my implementation on > it as far as I cleaned up the sources. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ian Duggan ian(a)ianduggan.net http://www.ianduggan.net

2 1

(no subject)
by tinker1 french 12 Feb '02

12 Feb '02

still looking for way to find pharmacys directory for overseas. _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

1 0