And a bit more digging. Yes, I'm clearly doing this wrong. In building nix-os/sys/src/k10/trap.c it should absolutely be using the Tos structure from nix, not the one in the host system.
How do I re-root this correctly for this build? Paul On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 4:47 PM Paul Lalonde <paul.a.lalo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, I thought, what could do. > > So I went to my rPi 400, set up SSH for github, got Ron's nix-os repo and > hit "mk". > When that errored out a bunch I realized that I needed /amd64 built, so I > did that. Just as painless as I remembered. > > And now, I get a ways further into the build, but hit an incompatibility > between the my /amd64/include/ureg.h and .../nix-os/amd64/include/ureg.h. > It seems that at some point since the NIX code was written someone decided > that the program counter should be called pc instead of ip. > > Or else, I'm approaching this all wrong, and Ron can shed some light on > how I should be proceeding. > > Paul > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 4:01 PM Ron Minnich <rminn...@p9f.org> wrote: > >> I found the original 2011 paper, which was a sandia report, from may >> 2011. It's a modification of the original proposal, which I no longer >> have; but it is a good summary of where we were at the end of my visit >> in May. >> >> This is interesting: "We have changed a surprisingly small amount of >> code at this point. >> There are about 400 lines of new >> assembler source, about 80 lines of platform independent C source, and >> about 350 lines of AMD64 C >> source code. To this, we have to add a few extra source lines in the >> start-up code, system call, and trap han- >> dlers. This implementation is being both developed and tested only in >> the AMD64 architecture." >> >> I uploaded it to the Plan 9 foundation shared drive: >> >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F41_4MFpio3UsnxOpTJBiypUrHjkinL-/view?usp=share_link >> >> On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 10:18 AM <tlaro...@kergis.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 09:20:06AM -0800, Ron Minnich wrote: >> > > >> > > Why NIX? >> > > >> > > If you think about it, timesharing is designed for a world where cores >> > > are scarce. But on a machine with hundreds of cores, running Plan 9, >> > > there are < 100 processes. We can assign a core to each process, and >> > > let those processes own the core until they are done. This might be a >> > > useful simplification, it might not, but it's something. >> > > >> > > I did run some standard HPC benchmarks on NIX ACs and the results were >> > > good. I was always curious how it would work if we had those >> > > multi-hundred-core machines Intel and IBM and others were telling us >> > > about in 2011. Now that we have them, it would be interesting to try. >> > >> > As said previously, I will start wandering and stumbling upon problems >> > this week-end---I'm a toddler in the area, so it's the way to learn to >> > walk. >> > >> > But this brief summary highlight a solution and questions >> > that are, IMHO, valid questions: remember the "war" between >> > "micro-kernels" and "monolithic kernels"? In Unix, the kernel is not a >> > separate process (well: there are "administrative" processes, >> > scheduler and pager but...) but part of the applications. This is also >> > why it is efficient compared to "message passing" micro-kernels that >> > are not "near" enough the hardware---so inefficient that, for >> > ideologic purposes, some have rewritten "micro-kernels" in assembly to >> > improve the result... >> > >> > But multiple cores (and even in the smaller machines nowadays, you >> > find two) present another mean of articulation of the OS code (the >> > MMU is central for me in the whole picture: not move the data >> > around, but change the view of the shared data per core). The question >> > is at least certainly worth asking. >> > >> > -- >> > Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ kergis +dot+ com> >> > http://www.kergis.com/ >> > http://kertex.kergis.com/ >> > Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T7692a612f26c8ec5-M90261d7d07b2ef0e41bd249e Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
