On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 09:54 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> The 2.6.11.3 kernel with the 2.6.10 driver seems to fail with the same
> sym2 driver error - so I suppose it goes deeper than the driver itself.
>
Let's move that to linuxppc64-dev and drop the
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 09:54 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
The 2.6.11.3 kernel with the 2.6.10 driver seems to fail with the same
sym2 driver error - so I suppose it goes deeper than the driver itself.
Let's move that to linuxppc64-dev and drop the CC-list.
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
> 2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
> (could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
> long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you try 2.6.11 with the 2.6.10 sym
James Bottomley wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:17 +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Heh, the devel version of sym2 (that isn't submitted yet because
it depends on a few changes to the SPI transport that James hasn't
integrated yet) would probably fix this as it doesn't call iounmap()
until the
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:17 +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Heh, the devel version of sym2 (that isn't submitted yet because
> it depends on a few changes to the SPI transport that James hasn't
> integrated yet) would probably fix this as it doesn't call iounmap()
> until the driver exits.
They're
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 04:59:43PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Ok, we have it working here on a similar machine with 2.6.11 and failing
> in a similar way with bk which is why I asked ;)
>
> The bk problem is found & fixed here tho. I'll send a patch later, it's
> a bug with ppc64
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 04:59:43PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Ok, we have it working here on a similar machine with 2.6.11 and failing
in a similar way with bk which is why I asked ;)
The bk problem is found fixed here tho. I'll send a patch later, it's
a bug with ppc64 iounmap()
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:17 +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Heh, the devel version of sym2 (that isn't submitted yet because
it depends on a few changes to the SPI transport that James hasn't
integrated yet) would probably fix this as it doesn't call iounmap()
until the driver exits.
They're
James Bottomley wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:17 +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Heh, the devel version of sym2 (that isn't submitted yet because
it depends on a few changes to the SPI transport that James hasn't
integrated yet) would probably fix this as it doesn't call iounmap()
until the
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 11:05 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
2.6.10 seems to have a different kernel panic which I'm investigating
(could be a problem with my ramdisk as it happens in my linuxrc). So
long story short the 2.6.10 sym driver looks ok.
Can you try 2.6.11 with the 2.6.10 sym
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 19:47 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
> >
> > I confirmed that this occurs with the 2.6.11 code straight from
> > kernel.org Here is an error from the bringup:
>
> So if 2.6.9 works, and 2.6.11 does not, can you check 2.6.10?
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:25:56PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > BTW, Linus: Any chance you ever change something to version or
> > extraversion in bk just after a release ? I know I already ask and it
> > degenerated into a
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:25:56PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > BTW, Linus: Any chance you ever change something to version or
> > extraversion in bk just after a release ? I know I already ask and it
> > degenerated into a flamefest,
Linus Torvalds wrote:
There are certainly sym changes in there too since 2.6.9, let's see if
James or Willy have any suggestions. It might not be ppc64-specific.
Linus
I have tried with 2.6.10, this appears to fail as well. Unfortunately I
don't have console access right now
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
>
> I confirmed that this occurs with the 2.6.11 code straight from
> kernel.org Here is an error from the bringup:
So if 2.6.9 works, and 2.6.11 does not, can you check 2.6.10? And perhaps
hunt it down even more, to a -rc release?
> sym0: No
Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Are you sure it's plain 2.6.11 and not some bk clone of after 2.6.11 was
released ?
Ben - I am in the process of downloading a clean tarball from
kernel.org to be 100% certain.
I confirmed that this occurs with the 2.6.11 code straight
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Are you sure it's plain 2.6.11 and not some bk clone of after 2.6.11 was
released ?
Ben - I am in the process of downloading a clean tarball from kernel.org
to be 100% certain.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> BTW, Linus: Any chance you ever change something to version or
> extraversion in bk just after a release ? I know I already ask and it
> degenerated into a flamefest, and I don't know if that is specifically
> the case now, but I keep
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 19:51 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
> Seems with 2.6.11 the sym53c8xx kernel module incorrectly identifies the
> cache being misconfigured on a p630 (ppc64, POWER4+). 2.6.9 correctly
> brings up this adaptor as does AIX with absolutely no indication of a
> misconfigured
Seems with 2.6.11 the sym53c8xx kernel module incorrectly identifies the
cache being misconfigured on a p630 (ppc64, POWER4+). 2.6.9 correctly
brings up this adaptor as does AIX with absolutely no indication of a
misconfigured cache.
Doing a simple diff I see ALOT of changes between 2.6.9 and
Seems with 2.6.11 the sym53c8xx kernel module incorrectly identifies the
cache being misconfigured on a p630 (ppc64, POWER4+). 2.6.9 correctly
brings up this adaptor as does AIX with absolutely no indication of a
misconfigured cache.
Doing a simple diff I see ALOT of changes between 2.6.9 and
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 19:51 -0600, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
Seems with 2.6.11 the sym53c8xx kernel module incorrectly identifies the
cache being misconfigured on a p630 (ppc64, POWER4+). 2.6.9 correctly
brings up this adaptor as does AIX with absolutely no indication of a
misconfigured cache.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
BTW, Linus: Any chance you ever change something to version or
extraversion in bk just after a release ? I know I already ask and it
degenerated into a flamefest, and I don't know if that is specifically
the case now, but I keep getting
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Are you sure it's plain 2.6.11 and not some bk clone of after 2.6.11 was
released ?
Ben - I am in the process of downloading a clean tarball from kernel.org
to be 100% certain.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of
Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Are you sure it's plain 2.6.11 and not some bk clone of after 2.6.11 was
released ?
Ben - I am in the process of downloading a clean tarball from
kernel.org to be 100% certain.
I confirmed that this occurs with the 2.6.11 code straight
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
I confirmed that this occurs with the 2.6.11 code straight from
kernel.org Here is an error from the bringup:
So if 2.6.9 works, and 2.6.11 does not, can you check 2.6.10? And perhaps
hunt it down even more, to a -rc release?
sym0: No NVRAM,
Linus Torvalds wrote:
There are certainly sym changes in there too since 2.6.9, let's see if
James or Willy have any suggestions. It might not be ppc64-specific.
Linus
I have tried with 2.6.10, this appears to fail as well. Unfortunately I
don't have console access right now
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:25:56PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
BTW, Linus: Any chance you ever change something to version or
extraversion in bk just after a release ? I know I already ask and it
degenerated into a flamefest, and I
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:25:56PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
BTW, Linus: Any chance you ever change something to version or
extraversion in bk just after a release ? I know I already ask and it
degenerated into a flamefest, and I
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 19:47 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote:
I confirmed that this occurs with the 2.6.11 code straight from
kernel.org Here is an error from the bringup:
So if 2.6.9 works, and 2.6.11 does not, can you check 2.6.10? And
36 matches
Mail list logo
