Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:12:28PM -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > Do you bother with the gentoo patches? Only the Kconfig patch that gives quick access to gentoo required configs is really useful, the rest I would call minor. If you copy your config from gentoo-sources to the git tree, the required ones will already be active you can skip genpatches altogether. > I have the kernel tree and none of the tags say longterm, The tags don't say longterm, the website (kernel.org) says which releases are longterm support ones. > do I have the wrong tree or something?The url I have is > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git That's the development tree, if you want the stable/longterm releases use this one: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git You should be able to add it to your existing tree using something like: git remote add stable git fetch stable although it does take a while ;)
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
Alec Ten Harmselwrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:12:28PM -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > Rich Freeman wrote: > > > > > Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they > > > were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of > > > the kernel tree and checkout from tags. > > > > Do you bother with the gentoo patches? > > I seem to recall the list having a discussion about gentoo-sources vs. > vanilla-sources a while ago, and I believe Rich doesn't use the gentoo > patches. It doesn't seem like he does, since just above he mentions that > he builds and runs kernels from a checkout of a git repo from > kernel.org. > > > I have the kernel tree and none of the tags say longterm, do I have the > > wrong tree or something?The url I have is > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > The stable tree is > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git. > Only X.Y tags go into Linus' git repo, not X.Y.Z. When they switched > from version 2 to version 3, the numbering scheme changed a bit. Any > kernel version with a third version number is either stable or long > term, and if the last number in the version is more than 8 or 10, it is > probably going to be a long term kernel. > > This is pretty much the rationale that I use for updating - as soon as a > kernel version higher than the one I'm currently running has the last > number in the version hit 8 or 10, I upgrade. OK, that is interesting, I like to use Linus's tree for fooling around, so that tells me something. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:12:28PM -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > Rich Freemanwrote: > > > Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they > > were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of > > the kernel tree and checkout from tags. > > Do you bother with the gentoo patches? I seem to recall the list having a discussion about gentoo-sources vs. vanilla-sources a while ago, and I believe Rich doesn't use the gentoo patches. It doesn't seem like he does, since just above he mentions that he builds and runs kernels from a checkout of a git repo from kernel.org. > I have the kernel tree and none of the tags say longterm, do I have the > wrong tree or something?The url I have is > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git The stable tree is git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git. Only X.Y tags go into Linus' git repo, not X.Y.Z. When they switched from version 2 to version 3, the numbering scheme changed a bit. Any kernel version with a third version number is either stable or long term, and if the last number in the version is more than 8 or 10, it is probably going to be a long term kernel. This is pretty much the rationale that I use for updating - as soon as a kernel version higher than the one I'm currently running has the last number in the version hit 8 or 10, I upgrade. Alec
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
On 2015-10-08 07:50, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:12:28PM -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > Rich Freemanwrote: > > > > > Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they > > > were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of > > > the kernel tree and checkout from tags. > > > > Do you bother with the gentoo patches? > > I seem to recall the list having a discussion about gentoo-sources vs. > vanilla-sources a while ago, and I believe Rich doesn't use the gentoo > patches. It doesn't seem like he does, since just above he mentions that > he builds and runs kernels from a checkout of a git repo from > kernel.org. > > > I have the kernel tree and none of the tags say longterm, do I have the > > wrong tree or something?The url I have is > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > The stable tree is > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git. > Only X.Y tags go into Linus' git repo, not X.Y.Z. When they switched > from version 2 to version 3, the numbering scheme changed a bit. Any > kernel version with a third version number is either stable or long > term, and if the last number in the version is more than 8 or 10, it is > probably going to be a long term kernel. They list the longterm and stable releases quite neatly on their front page, no need for guessing: https://kernel.org/ -- Tuomo Hartikainen
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
Am 08.10.2015 um 03:10 schrieb Rich Freeman: > Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they > were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of > the kernel tree and checkout from tags. I never really understood what difference the gentoo-patches make. gentoo-sources vs. vanilla git-clone: could you describe why to prefer the last one? thanks!
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 08.10.2015 um 03:10 schrieb Rich Freeman: > >> Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they >> were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of >> the kernel tree and checkout from tags. > I never really understood what difference the gentoo-patches make. > > gentoo-sources vs. vanilla git-clone: could you describe why to prefer > the last one? > > thanks! > > > > Maybe this will help: https://dev.gentoo.org/~mpagano/genpatches/about.htm Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
Rich Freemanwrote: > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:13 PM, wrote: > > Hi. I am getting some kind of kernel panick in 4.2.1 -- it boots up OK, > > ... > > how > > do I get any information about what happened -- serial console or other > > means? Can I do a console over the network without additional hardware? > > That is pretty simple actually. > > Set CONFIG_NETCONSOLE=y/m in your kernel config if it is not already set. > add to your kernel command line: > netconsole=@192.168.0.10/eth0,@192.168.0.5/1c:6f:65:ab:07:b2 > > (The first set of values is port@src-ip/interface. The second set of > values is port@dest-ip/MAC. This is low-level code in the kernel so > it is just sending raw UDP packets - the routine sending them has no > idea what your interface IP is, and it can't use ARP.) > > On the destination machine, run "nc -u -l -p " > > That will listen for console output and dump it to stdout. You'll get > everything that goes to dmesg on the remote machine, including > BUG/PANIC/etc output. It works fine even if the disks stop syncing. > > > > > The reason I went with that kernel is because I want to try btrfs and > > they develop fast, so it looked from Google searching that I should be > > on 4.2 or thereabouts. The btrfs programs I emerged did say 4.2. > > > > If you're having btrfs issues on such a recent kernel you should > probably at least run all the backports that are available for it. > > There are undoubtedly many btrfs issues in 4.2.1 that have been fixed > in 4.2.3, so you should probably be running this version if you want > to stick with 4.2. > > Personally, I've been sticking with 3.18 until 4.1 quiets down. There > are usually regressions in any new kernel version with btrfs. > > > So, I would like to go on two paths at once -- find out about the > > panick, and maybe go to a lower kernel as well, but I was concerned > > about btrfs if I do that. I have not created the pool yet. > > Generally speaking the btrfs on-disk format is stable, so for the most > part you can switch back and forth between versions without issue. If > you want to go to a really old kernel series like maybe 3.12 there > might be a few optional btrfs features that won't work, but in general > I'd stick with something newer. > > So, if you want to be bleeding-edge then stick with the bleeding edge > and run the latest stable. If you want something longterm I'd stick > with the 1st-2nd most recent longterm. 4.1 is still pretty new, but > I'm close to switching over to it. > > You'd need to post the details of the panic to know more - the btrfs > list is probably the best place. But again I'd confirm the panic on > the latest release in the series you're running so as to not waste > time on issues that may already be fixed. Thanks much -- 4.2.1 wqas what I just got using gentoo-sources, I will sync and try again, maybe go to 4.1 and see what happens. I heard 3.19 was the first version where btrfs actually worked, and I have 3.18 here, this is why I was trying the newer kernel. So, what is the latest lts kernel these days anyway? Thanks again. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:13 PM,wrote: > Hi. I am getting some kind of kernel panick in 4.2.1 -- it boots up OK, > ... > how > do I get any information about what happened -- serial console or other > means? Can I do a console over the network without additional hardware? That is pretty simple actually. Set CONFIG_NETCONSOLE=y/m in your kernel config if it is not already set. add to your kernel command line: netconsole=@192.168.0.10/eth0,@192.168.0.5/1c:6f:65:ab:07:b2 (The first set of values is port@src-ip/interface. The second set of values is port@dest-ip/MAC. This is low-level code in the kernel so it is just sending raw UDP packets - the routine sending them has no idea what your interface IP is, and it can't use ARP.) On the destination machine, run "nc -u -l -p " That will listen for console output and dump it to stdout. You'll get everything that goes to dmesg on the remote machine, including BUG/PANIC/etc output. It works fine even if the disks stop syncing. > > The reason I went with that kernel is because I want to try btrfs and > they develop fast, so it looked from Google searching that I should be > on 4.2 or thereabouts. The btrfs programs I emerged did say 4.2. > If you're having btrfs issues on such a recent kernel you should probably at least run all the backports that are available for it. There are undoubtedly many btrfs issues in 4.2.1 that have been fixed in 4.2.3, so you should probably be running this version if you want to stick with 4.2. Personally, I've been sticking with 3.18 until 4.1 quiets down. There are usually regressions in any new kernel version with btrfs. > So, I would like to go on two paths at once -- find out about the > panick, and maybe go to a lower kernel as well, but I was concerned > about btrfs if I do that. I have not created the pool yet. Generally speaking the btrfs on-disk format is stable, so for the most part you can switch back and forth between versions without issue. If you want to go to a really old kernel series like maybe 3.12 there might be a few optional btrfs features that won't work, but in general I'd stick with something newer. So, if you want to be bleeding-edge then stick with the bleeding edge and run the latest stable. If you want something longterm I'd stick with the 1st-2nd most recent longterm. 4.1 is still pretty new, but I'm close to switching over to it. You'd need to post the details of the panic to know more - the btrfs list is probably the best place. But again I'd confirm the panic on the latest release in the series you're running so as to not waste time on issues that may already be fixed. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:34 PM,wrote: > Rich Freeman wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:13 PM, wrote: >> > >> > Thanks much -- 4.2.1 wqas what I just got using gentoo-sources, I will >> > sync and try again, maybe go to 4.1 and see what happens. I heard 3.19 >> > was the first version where btrfs actually worked, and I have 3.18 here, >> > this is why I was trying the newer kernel. So, what is the latest lts >> > kernel these days anyway? >> > >> >> btrfs has been continually improved, but it has been working >> reasonably well for raid0/1 or single disk since maybe the 3.12 days. >> >> Current kernel versions are posted at https://kernel.org/ > How can I tell which ones are long term support? They say longterm next to them. :) Stable ones will have releases for a few months typically. Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of the kernel tree and checkout from tags. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
Rich Freemanwrote: > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:34 PM, wrote: > > Rich Freeman wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:13 PM, wrote: > >> > > >> > Thanks much -- 4.2.1 wqas what I just got using gentoo-sources, I will > >> > sync and try again, maybe go to 4.1 and see what happens. I heard 3.19 > >> > was the first version where btrfs actually worked, and I have 3.18 here, > >> > this is why I was trying the newer kernel. So, what is the latest lts > >> > kernel these days anyway? > >> > > >> > >> btrfs has been continually improved, but it has been working > >> reasonably well for raid0/1 or single disk since maybe the 3.12 days. > >> > >> Current kernel versions are posted at https://kernel.org/ > > How can I tell which ones are long term support? > > They say longterm next to them. :) > > Stable ones will have releases for a few months typically. > > Gentoo-sources keywording tends to lag a bit, though I thought they > were going to change that. I tend to just keep my own git clone of > the kernel tree and checkout from tags. Do you bother with the gentoo patches? I have the kernel tree and none of the tags say longterm, do I have the wrong tree or something?The url I have is git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
Rich Freemanwrote: > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:13 PM, wrote: > > > > Thanks much -- 4.2.1 wqas what I just got using gentoo-sources, I will > > sync and try again, maybe go to 4.1 and see what happens. I heard 3.19 > > was the first version where btrfs actually worked, and I have 3.18 here, > > this is why I was trying the newer kernel. So, what is the latest lts > > kernel these days anyway? > > > > btrfs has been continually improved, but it has been working > reasonably well for raid0/1 or single disk since maybe the 3.12 days. > > Current kernel versions are posted at https://kernel.org/ How can I tell which ones are long term support? -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel panick in 4.2.1 from gentoo-sources
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:13 PM,wrote: > > Thanks much -- 4.2.1 wqas what I just got using gentoo-sources, I will > sync and try again, maybe go to 4.1 and see what happens. I heard 3.19 > was the first version where btrfs actually worked, and I have 3.18 here, > this is why I was trying the newer kernel. So, what is the latest lts > kernel these days anyway? > btrfs has been continually improved, but it has been working reasonably well for raid0/1 or single disk since maybe the 3.12 days. Current kernel versions are posted at https://kernel.org/ -- Rich