asterisk users - Dec 2003 - some success with linux 2.6 and wcfxo

Hi ,

  I picked up a x100p the other day and thaught I'd havea  go at getting the
driver going for linux 2.6, things have gone pretty, two basic problems.

1. makefiles, with 2.6 you can't get away with using the old makefile to
build
the kernel modules, they will build but you'll get an error along the lines
of
"no module found in object". This is due to not using the new 2.6
kbuild stuff.
I have a working makefile for building the modules now, it's mostly just a
case
of setting up an obj-m target with all the modules in and building with...

make -C /usr/src/linux SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules

 A few of the modules (the torisa and tor2 ones come to mind), don;t build at
all. The others will build but...

2. Interrupt return values now need to be given, if you convert the interrupt
handlers to return irqreturn_t, and return IRQ_HANDLED or IRQ_NONE as
appropriate (I mostly just guessed here as to whether the driver had done
anything useful, not terribly accurate, but it got things going).

  Without this you get reports of spurious interrupt return values and all
other kinds of nasty stuff happens.

3. The module useage stuff is deprecated so currently the modules get marked as
unsafe for unloading, this isn't a problem in basic functionality terms
though.

  So building zaptel.ko and wcfxo.ko then insmod'ing those and ztcfg and
everthing seems to be up and running, don't know how stable it is really but
I
can make inbound and outbound calls, all the signalling and alarams stuff seems
to be picked up.

  I'd like to thank everyone on #asterisk for all the support they gave to a
fellow linux enthusiast... absoutely none.
 
-- 
Tristan 'Still Running 2.6, so there :P' Colgate
<minty@deadweb.net> | ICQ #154577755
-----------
  "I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but
 I am, so that's how it comes out"
				- Bill Hicks

anyone with some succes with the drivers for the TE410p ?

joachim.



At 14:06 6/12/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi ,
>
>   I picked up a x100p the other day and thaught I'd havea  go at
getting the
>driver going for linux 2.6, things have gone pretty, two basic problems.
>
>1. makefiles, with 2.6 you can't get away with using the old makefile to
build
>the kernel modules, they will build but you'll get an error along the
lines of
>"no module found in object". This is due to not using the new 2.6
kbuild
>stuff.
>I have a working makefile for building the modules now, it's mostly just
a
>case
>of setting up an obj-m target with all the modules in and building with...
>
>make -C /usr/src/linux SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules
>
>  A few of the modules (the torisa and tor2 ones come to mind), don;t build
at
>all. The others will build but...
>
>2. Interrupt return values now need to be given, if you convert the
interrupt
>handlers to return irqreturn_t, and return IRQ_HANDLED or IRQ_NONE as
>appropriate (I mostly just guessed here as to whether the driver had done
>anything useful, not terribly accurate, but it got things going).
>
>   Without this you get reports of spurious interrupt return values and all
>other kinds of nasty stuff happens.
>
>3. The module useage stuff is deprecated so currently the modules get 
>marked as
>unsafe for unloading, this isn't a problem in basic functionality terms 
>though.
>
>   So building zaptel.ko and wcfxo.ko then insmod'ing those and ztcfg
and
>everthing seems to be up and running, don't know how stable it is really
but I
>can make inbound and outbound calls, all the signalling and alarams stuff 
>seems
>to be picked up.
>
>   I'd like to thank everyone on #asterisk for all the support they gave
to a
>fellow linux enthusiast... absoutely none.
>
>--
>Tristan 'Still Running 2.6, so there :P' Colgate
><minty@deadweb.net> | ICQ #154577755
>-----------
>   "I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but
>  I am, so that's how it comes out"
>                                 - Bill Hicks
>_______________________________________________
>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Tristan 'Minty' Colgate wrote:
> 
>   I'd like to thank everyone on #asterisk for all the support they gave
to a
> fellow linux enthusiast... absoutely none.
>  
That was really a nice post until right at the end here.

I hope you understand that cheap shots like this just make *you* look 
like an asshole, and provide plenty of evidence for everyone reading 
that we're dealing with a prima donna.

AFAIK everyone involved in improving asterisk is plenty busy. You did 
the right thing--charging forth into the problem space to see what you 
could accomplish--but then you spoiled it at the end by whining at the 
rest of us for not helping you.

B.

I for one would be very interested in seeing your moded makefiles, I'm
also trying to use 2.6 wherever possible.
 
-- 
Dave Cotton <dcotton@linuxautrement.com>