Author Topic: OS/4 (technical details only)  (Read 19041 times)

Mikhail

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #30 on: July 01, 2018, 09:31:36 pm »
Hello everyone!
I'm a little confused. Is it possible to install the OS.4 kernel on the current version of ArcaOS (5.02)?
I still have the old version of the ACPI installation package (3.23.01), but after its installation the system stops loading - apparently the kernel already works only with a fresh ACPI driver.
How bad is the idea of ​​installing OS / 4 without a patch on ACPI?
My ACPI.pcd (from the package for ArcaOS) fails to verify the patch with the correct ACPI3_23_01.PAT file

Roderick Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 18
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #31 on: July 01, 2018, 10:48:31 pm »
No. to the best of my understanding you can not install the OS/4 kernel with the current versions of ACPI.

Best regards,

Roderick Klein


Lars

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 43
  • Posts: 428
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #32 on: July 01, 2018, 11:10:23 pm »
OS/4 comes with OS4APIC.PSD which you have to use with the /APIC Switch to Use multiple CPUs.

Mikhail

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #33 on: July 01, 2018, 11:14:25 pm »
Soooo ... i.e. there is no need for a patch ACPI when using APIC?

Roderick Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 18
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #34 on: July 01, 2018, 11:57:26 pm »
Well that driver as far as I can tell does not provide all the support that the ACPI.PSD provices.

Mikhail

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #35 on: July 02, 2018, 01:27:50 am »
I took a risk, but something went wrong. The current release and the previous one that I ran on the previous motherboard did not boot. On booting I see only the logo. If I delete it then I see the inscription, something like - Loading: oemhlp, and it lasts forever

The current motherboard is Supermicro X10SBA, before that OS4 tested on different platforms, Andrey Vasilkin was very helpful, then there were no problems.

Lars

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 43
  • Posts: 428
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #36 on: July 02, 2018, 09:16:46 am »
OS4APIC.PSD supports multiple processors and in particular, the use of the APIC instead of the old PIC (something that is necessary for a multi-core / multi-processor system ,the PIC does not support a multi-processor configuration).
It does not support ACPI as such. However there is a free driver ACPI4.BPD (or some such, on the web page where you also find the OS4 kernel) that adds ACPI support. The current state of ACPI4.BPD is experimental. You just drop the file into the \OS2\BOOT directory where it is loaded automagically.
Apart from OS4KRNLR / OS4KRNL you will also need to dump all the other stuff of the OS4 kernel package to the right place. There are various drivers that need to go into the OS2\BOOT directory, including OEMHLP.BPD which is the OS4 kernel guys' way of supporting the OEMHLP driver interface. Again, this driver is loaded automagically (as every driver under OS4 which has the .BPD file name extension).
Last but not least you have an updated DOSCALL1.DLL in the OS4 kernel package. I have placed that into a subdir \OS4\DLL so that I can create myself an alternate config.os4 (which you need to do anyway so that you can load different drivers for the OS4 kernel) where I put \OS4\DLL before \OS2\DLL in LIBPATH.
I can only speak for myself but on my system (an 8-core AMD board from ASRock) the OS4 kernel works just as well as the standard OS2 kernel.

The only current change that the OS4 kernel guys have decided to do is to make the RM (Resource Management) interface to the drivers a 32-bit/flat interface which brings some changes to device driver writers. But nothing the users is directly affected with.

If you do all of the above then yes, you won't need ACPI.PSD if you run the OS4 kernel.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2018, 09:47:03 am by Lars »

OS4User

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 28
  • -Receive: 6
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #37 on: July 02, 2018, 03:11:01 pm »
I'm a little confused. Is it possible to install the OS.4 kernel on the current version of ArcaOS (5.02)?

Somebody told me that he successfully installed OS/4 into latest ArcaOS.

I still have the old version of the ACPI installation package (3.23.01), but after its installation the system stops loading - apparently the kernel already works only with a fresh ACPI driver.

First of all, I hope that you have performed the install exactly as it is written in the HowTo file supplied with kernel. OS/4 does not support the latest version of ACPI.psd so you need an older version.

How bad is the idea of ​​installing OS / 4 without a patch on ACPI?

Unpatched ACPI.psd spoils OS/4 kernel during the system boot that's why it has to be patched and /ST=0 has to be put into PSD line in Config.sys

My ACPI.pcd (from the package for ArcaOS) fails to verify the patch with the correct ACPI3_23_01.PAT file

ACPI.psd from Arca package  may be needs to be unpacked by lxlite utility before applying the patch.


Lars

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 43
  • Posts: 428
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #38 on: July 02, 2018, 05:05:30 pm »
So what does ACPI.PSD add ? If I use ACPI4.BPD I can do the things that I expect: for example, execute "shutdown" with the system powering off at the end (much like APM). For CPU temperature control, I don't know in how far ACPI4.BPD supports that.

The one thing that OS4APIC.PSD/ACPI4.BPD does not support is MSI interrupts (or am I wrong ?) which the latest versions of ACPI.PSD do. But as far as I understand you need 2 things for MSI to work:
1) MSI support in ACPI.PSD (or OS4APIC.PSD/ ACPI4.BPD)
2) MSI support in the kernel itself (AN comes with an updated kernel that goes together with the latest versions of ACPI.PSD)


That's one of the reasons why I said repeatedly that the OS4 kernel needs better documentation ...

Mikhail

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #39 on: July 02, 2018, 05:19:12 pm »
If you do all of the above then yes, you won't need ACPI.PSD if you run the OS4 kernel.

For the ArcaOS 5.02 I installed, I did all these things. I'll try on the older 5.01, but I think in this case it's a hardware compatibility issue.

Well, we will build a UPNP audio renderer on the stock os/2 core.

David Graser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 61
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #40 on: July 02, 2018, 06:17:39 pm »
[D:\OS2\BOOT]bldlevel acpi.psd
Build Level Display Facility Version 6.12.675 Sep 25 2001
(C) Copyright IBM Corporation 1993-2001
Signature:       @#Arca Noae LLC:3.23.09#@##1## 13 May 2018 19:5
   ::::09::@@ACPI based PSD for OS/2 (c) 2018 Arca Noae LLC
Vendor:          Arca Noae LLC
Revision:        3.23.09
Date/Time:       13 May 2018 19:55:35
Build Machine:   DAZAR1
File Version:    3.23.9
Description:     ACPI based PSD for OS/2 (c) 2018 Arca Noae LLC

This is with ArcaOS 5.02.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the patches only work for versions 3.23.6 and earlier.

OS4User

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 28
  • -Receive: 6
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #41 on: July 02, 2018, 06:22:27 pm »
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the patches only work for versions 3.23.6 and earlier.

Patches are available for:
3.22.03
3.22.06
3.22.06 dbg
3.23.01
3.23.01 dbg

Mikhail

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #42 on: July 02, 2018, 06:23:02 pm »
That's one of the reasons why I said repeatedly that the OS4 kernel needs better documentation ...

I confirm these words!

As I said earlier, without help from Andrey Vasilkin, I would hardly understand how to make the correct installation, it was in the build SVN5067, then the manual was much worse than the current one. Now the folder structure in the archive is ready and there is a clear manual, but still a lot of conventions that are not obvious.

For example, I,as an ArcaOS user, do not understand which version (5.01, 5.02) OS/4 installation is preferred. Is it possible to apply the patch to the versions of the ACPI emerging in packages subscription to ArcaOS, and generally whether it is if there is an alternative in the face of ACPI4? Do I need to register ACPI4.Bpd in config? Or just put it in the OS2/BOOT folder

Even that would just find APIC4.BPD I've wasted a lot of time.

But all those guys including the ones from Russia who are engaged in this product - Уважуха!

P.S. - On the SuperMicro X10SBA motherboard with the Intel® Celeron J1900 (4cores) processor, I was unable to run the OS/4 project with ArcaOS 5.01 or 5.02, as ACPI was using ACPI4.BPD and PSD = os4apic.psd / APIC
But the loading stop, it seems to me, took place long before the ACPI check. The last inscription on the screen without logo - loading oemhlp
 those. the stop occurs immediately after you try to load the selected item from the os2ldr menu.

Sadly, I wanted to evaluate the effect of this core on the sound quality in the system with this motherboard.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2018, 09:03:41 pm by Mikhail »

OS4User

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 28
  • -Receive: 6
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #43 on: July 03, 2018, 12:59:28 am »
but still a lot of conventions that are not obvious.
Please  advise what wasn't obvious and it will be added to HowTo file

For example, I,as an ArcaOS user, do not understand which version (5.01, 5.02) OS/4 installation is preferred.
To tell the truth, the version of ArcaOS doesn't matter, that's why this info is not included in HowTo file.

Is it possible to apply the patch to the versions of the ACPI emerging in packages subscription to ArcaOS, and generally whether it is if there is an alternative in the face of ACPI4? Do I need to register ACPI4.Bpd in config? Or just put it in the OS2/BOOT folder

Even that would just find APIC4.BPD I've wasted a lot of time.

The available patches are listed in the README.TXT which is together with patches.
ACPI.BPD is beta now and is not distributed widely. When one person receives ACPI.BPD he also receives instructions how to apply it to the system. ACPI.BPD is an optional driver.

P.S. - On the SuperMicro X10SBA motherboard with the Intel® Celeron J1900 (4cores) processor, I was unable to run the OS/4 project with ArcaOS 5.01 or 5.02, as ACPI was using ACPI4.BPD and PSD = os4apic.psd / APIC
But the loading stop, it seems to me, took place long before the ACPI check. The last inscription on the screen without logo - loading oemhlp those. the stop occurs immediately after you try to load the selected item from the os2ldr menu.

It would be great if you could get a comport log, meanwhile in the OS/4 hardware tested list there is one mobo with J1900, so there is a chance that your mobo may also start working.

Mikhail

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 0
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (technical details only)
« Reply #44 on: July 03, 2018, 12:30:15 pm »
It would be great if you could get a comport log, meanwhile in the OS/4 hardware tested list there is one mobo with J1900, so there is a chance that your mobo may also start working.

Please tell me how to get such a log. I need a Com-null modem cable and some software on the other side (Windows OS & with logging software, perhaps)? This type of testing, I have not yet conducted.