Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-17 Thread Robert Millan
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 08:45:06AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > I can live without knowing why the code needs to run in that address; but > I'm still puzzled by how is the code supposed to tell the assembler that the > 0x7ea9 chunk really should be saved to 0x4f. We can't remove my ad-hoc hac

Bug#494010: ITP: a52 -- Motorola DSP56001 assembler (Re: Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware)

2008-10-17 Thread Robert Millan
clone 494010 -1 retitle -1 ITP: a52 -- Motorola DSP56001 assembler block 494010 by -1 reassign -1 wnpp thanks *** debian-devel: Please drop #494010 from CC if your reply is only relevant to my ITP and not directly to that bug, thanks!*** * Package name: a52 Version : 1.3

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-16 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 04:50:11PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > Ok, fixed that. I got a 100% code match now. The only remaining question is > what's the deal with this section that's supposed to start at 0x7ea9 but > actually starts at 0x4f (0xed in the file). My code adds a workaround for >

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-16 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 12:32:15AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > - Attached patch fixes a few errors spit by a56. I think my other two > > fixes > > are correct, but I have no idea what the '<' / '>' candy is supposed to > > do > > (hints?). > > According to the assembler reference

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-15 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 07:49:19PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 06:12:23PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 03:16:56AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > It's for a Motorola 56000 (aka DSP56000 or DSP56K) processor, which is a > > > different architect

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-15 Thread Robert Millan
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 03:16:56AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > It's for a Motorola 56000 (aka DSP56000 or DSP56K) processor, which is a > different architecture but maybe with some similarities. I doubt we > have any of the necessary tools but the code is short enough to hand- > assemble. I fou

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-14 Thread Ben Hutchings
You wrote: > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 08:10:53PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > Here is the assembly-language source for the firmware, licenced under > > GPLv2. > > Very nice! Where did you find it? It was added to the upstream tree recently as part of the firmware separation effort. > > Adding

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-12 Thread Robert Millan
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 08:10:53PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Here is the assembly-language source for the firmware, licenced under > GPLv2. Very nice! Where did you find it? > Adding this to the kernel source package should fix this bug. Actually, it should be assembled and used. AFAICT th

Bug#494010: Source for dsp56k firmware

2008-10-12 Thread Ben Hutchings
Here is the assembly-language source for the firmware, licenced under GPLv2. Adding this to the kernel source package should fix this bug. Ben. ; Author: Frederik Noring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; ; This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public ; License. See the file CO