[OpenBIOS] SOLVED: the mystery of Solaris on SPARC32 and the missing Forth arguments

[Mark Cave-Ayland]

Blue Swirl wrote:

>> 1) Are the memory properties physical or virtual? (totphys and totavail
>> appear to be physical, where as totmap appears to be virtual?)
> 
> I think that's right. We don't update totavail, which is a linked list
> of all virtual memory zones available. So map_pages should add an
> entry to the list.

Yeah. The SPARC32 memory routines are quite simple in that they only 
have one item in each linked list; so while the memory regions 
represented in the device tree may not be exactly accurate, all memory 
within each region still meets the required criteria.

>> 2) Should the relevant properties in the /memory and /virtual-memory nodes
>> in the device tree be updated at the same time? (I think yes, as removing
>> the properties causes boot to fail even on SPARC32).
> 
> Probably and /virtual-memory nodes should have the same information as
> totavail list.

Yes, that sounds about right.

> Great job, anyway!

Thanks :)  Do you have access to any 32-bit Solaris images at the moment 
for testing purposes? Following up on the trap 0x29 error, it seems that 
Artyom sees this on the more modern versions of Solaris which suggests 
it may possibly be a qemu emulation bug (see the comments especially):

http://tyom.blogspot.com/2009/12/solaris-under-qemu-how-to.html

So it would be useful to have someone who understands both SPARC32 and 
qemu to take a look (hint, hint!) ;)


ATB,

Mark.

-- 
Mark Cave-Ayland - Senior Technical Architect
PostgreSQL - PostGIS
Sirius Corporation plc - control through freedom
http://www.siriusit.co.uk
t: +44 870 608 0063

Sirius Labs: http://www.siriusit.co.uk/labs