[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClib
From: |
Artyom Tarasenko |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.) |
Date: |
Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:39:24 +0100 |
2010/2/20 Blue Swirl <address@hidden>:
> On 2/20/10, Rob Landley <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Thursday 18 February 2010 05:21:16 Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
>> > 2010/2/17 Rob Landley <address@hidden>:
>> > > But it does imply that qemu is capable of decently running _something_
>> on
>> > > sparc, so the problems I'm seeing are more likely to be uClibc or
>> > > toolchain issues.
>> >
>> > qemu-sparc can decently run debian-40r8: gcc and all the other stuff
>> > seem to work.
>> >
>> > Most versions of the NetBSD boot. Some require the original OBP
>> > though. The only known to me version which definetely doesn't boot is
>> > 3.0.2.
>> >
>> > Also since the last dma fix Solaris 2.4-2.5.1 seems to be also fully
>> > functional. Don't have a suitable compiler to check whether it's
>> > working under Solaris though.
>> >
>> > Debian-40r8 should have all the necessary stuff to build the uClibc
>> > toolchain, right?
>>
>> So I did a network install of that Debian image into a 4 gig disk image, and
>> made some progress.
>>
>> First a quick bug report: qemu-system-sparc tries to set the video window to
>> 900 pixels vertical, but my laptop's display is only 800 pixels tall, and
>> the
>> window manager trims it a bit more than that for the toolbar. The kernel
>> booting up seems to think the graphics window is still its original size
>> renders text off the bottom of it. But for some reason I can grab the
>> window
>> and resize it, and when I do this the emulated kernel's frame buffer gets
>> the
>> update and resizes its console to show the correct number of lines of text
>> for
>> the new size! (So my question is, why didn't it get the size right when the
>> window manager first resized it before I manually resized it again?)
>>
>> Anyway: yay emulated sparc debian, I installed it, got a reasonable
>> environment going, extracted my root filesystem image under there and
>> chrooted
>> into it... and everything worked fine. (Well, trying to run a dynamically
>> linked "hello world" still died with a bus error, but using the static
>> busybox
>> I could mount a tmpfs and list its contents, which I never could before.)
>>
>> My plan had been to use sparc-debian's copy of gdb to track down why the
>> binaries were going funky... but in that environment, they were behaving
>> themselves. Same binaries, built with the same toolchain, same qemu-system-
>> sparc, same -M and -cpu and so on...
>>
>> So I think "A-ha! Booting a different kernel! That's gotta be it!"
>>
>> The debian-sparc image is using a 2.6.18 kernel (and I'm using a 2.6.32
>> kernel), but it installed the relevant .config in /boot, so I copied that
>> out
>> with scp, did a "make oldconfig" up to 2.6.32 (holding down the enter key
>> until
>> it shut up), stripped out all the modules and disabled module support, put
>> back in CONFIG_SERIAL_SUNZILOG_CONSOLE=y and friends, procfs, sysfs, and
>> tmpfs
>> (strange things to have as modules?), and CONFIG_SQUASHFS (that's my default
>> root filesystem format).
>>
>> I booted the result up with init=/bin/ash, did a "mount -t tmpfs /tmp /tmp",
>> and then:
>>
>> / # ls -l /tmp
>> Illegal instruction
>>
>> It's still misbehaving. Huh.
>>
>> This is as close as I can get to the debian kernel config without adding
>> module
>> support to my images (which is unnecessary complication for what they do).
>> I
>> can try an ext2 root filesystem image but I don't see how that would cause
>> this.
>>
>> The part I don't understand is that same busybox binary, built with the same
>> toolchain, worked just fine under the Debian kernel. I'd blame my
>> toolchain,
>> but in a slightly different context THE BINARIES WORKED...
>>
>> I don't understand what's going wrong here. Did the kernel break on sparc
>> sometime between 2.6.18 and 2.6.32 and nobody noticed? Is sparc using
>> software emulated floating point at the kernel level and that's configured
>> as a
>> module? (Except I don't think busybox ls uses floating point...)
>
> Sparc32 is not maintained anymore so maybe it broke at some point.
> There was some discussion a few years ago.
>
>> Do any sparc people understand what's going on here? My next step is to
>> grab
>> a 2.6.18 kernel and try to get _that_ to work with the tweaked debian config
>> (and an ext2 root filesystem since squashfs wasn't merged back then and had
>> a
>> format change when it was merged). But I'm mostly flailing around blind
>> here...
>
> I'm also trying different kernels using my .config. But already 2.6.12
> hangs in ESP probe.
Does it work on a real hw? 2.6.18 definitely does.
We still have bug(s) in ESP though: Solaris also hangs in ESP probe
after a soft reset in OBP.
--
Regards,
Artyom Tarasenko
solaris/sparc under qemu blog: http://tyom.blogspot.com/
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), Blue Swirl, 2010/02/20
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), Rob Landley, 2010/02/20
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), Blue Swirl, 2010/02/20
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), Rob Landley, 2010/02/20
- [Qemu-devel] Commit 085219f79cad broke Sparc-32 back in 2.6.28., Rob Landley, 2010/02/21
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Commit 085219f79cad broke Sparc-32 back in 2.6.28., David Miller, 2010/02/22
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Commit 085219f79cad broke Sparc-32 back in 2.6.28., Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, 2010/02/22
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Commit 085219f79cad broke Sparc-32 back in 2.6.28., Rob Landley, 2010/02/21
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Commit 085219f79cad broke Sparc-32 back in 2.6.28., David Miller, 2010/02/22
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), Artyom Tarasenko, 2010/02/20
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.),
Artyom Tarasenko <=
- [Qemu-devel] Re: Fun with sparc (was Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries.), Blue Swirl, 2010/02/20
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Rob Landley, 2010/02/17
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Alexander Graf, 2010/02/15
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Rob Landley, 2010/02/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Alexander Graf, 2010/02/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Rob Landley, 2010/02/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Stuart Brady, 2010/02/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-ppc can't run static uClibc binaries., Aurelien Jarno, 2010/02/28