Hi John, So, about kernel, we just could port 2.4 kernel to 2.6 and there would be no problem besides that closed firmware that runs on the other processor without MMU (/dev/dualcore).
About bootloader, the same bootloader that boots now could be used boot armel kernel, don't you think? As debian-arm is little endian stuff and debian-armel is little endian stuff with a new EABI, and the kernel is the one that understand about those things. (Is that right or i might be missing some point). Regards, Hector Oron 2007/6/21, John Willis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi Hector, >Could you tell what exactly propriety binary modules are shipped with >the 2.4 firmware? I do not have the code to hand but in simple terms it is all the control logic for decoding video using the ARM940t second core and undisclosed features of the hardware (MPEG acceleration, various accelerated decoding features etc.). They are not in a module 'per say', rather an open source loader (/dev/dualcpu, code is in Open2x's public SVN if your interested) that then loads the firmware BLOB onto the 920/940 on demand via the module. Thinking about it you could in theory rework the dualcpu module to play with 2.6 and still load the firmware to the correct place but I think you would be taking on an uphill struggle and I think other aspects of 2.6 would cause problems if any sort of compatibility was a goal (not saying that has to be a goal mind you, just that it seems odd to alienate existing users). Regards, John
-- Héctor Orón
