Tiny Core Base > TCB Talk
Linux kernel removing 486 support
Juanito:
It still doesn't apply cleanly:
--- Code: ---patch -Np1 -i ../linux-6.12.11_i486_fix.patch
patching file arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
patching file arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1098.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c.rej
patching file arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
patching file arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 395 (offset 6 lines).
patching file arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/internal.h
patching file arch/x86/kernel/head32.c
--- End code ---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c is only 1091 lines long and the code around that point does not resemble the patch.
The code does appear around line 610, so I'll try to compile with a manual patch...
CNK:
Yeah the reason "patch" can't find the new location is the lines immediately under the last change to that file is different in the later kernel versions:
6.12:
--- Code: --- if (dis_ucode_ldr || c->x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD || c->x86 < 0x10)
return 0;
find_blobs_in_containers(&cp);
if (!(cp.data && cp.size))
return -EINVAL;
--- End code ---
6.14:
--- Code: --- if (dis_ucode_ldr || c->x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD || c->x86 < 0x10)
return 0;
if (!find_blobs_in_containers(&cp))
return -EINVAL;
--- End code ---
That difference doesn't seem to matter for the code of the patch, and there are no other changes in the later versions of that function.
Juanito:
Test kernel compiled - could somebody with an i486 give it a go please?
http://tinycorelinux.net/16.x/x86/release/distribution_files/i486/bzImage
..temporarily replace the existing vmlinuz in your bootloader config with bzImage above to test.
CNK:
Boots fine on my 486DX2 PC!
gaben:
--- Quote from: CNK on May 12, 2025, 03:54:13 AM ---
--- Quote from: Paul_123 on May 11, 2025, 09:53:04 PM ---This patch is only going to help up until they remove the 486 support, from that point forward it’s a much bigger task to maintain if at all.
--- End quote ---
Sure, I wouldn't expect TCL to keep 486 support if they do that.
--- Quote from: Paul_123 on May 11, 2025, 09:53:04 PM ---It does look like the fix CNK mentioned was just merged into mainline.
--- End quote ---
Great, yes I see it here.
--- End quote ---
I saw that this fix might be related to a regression introduced in TCL 16 where I think I saw you reported it would not boot on a VIA C7 CPU. Are you able to verify whether this patch fixes the booting on C7 as well?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version