Re: [XenPPC] Help with JS21 disk solution

2006-09-25 Thread Segher Boessenkool
@@ -126,6 +126,8 @@ static void u4_inv_entry(ulong pgn) union dart_ctl dc; ulong retries = 0; +return u4_inv_all(); If you need inv_all here, you have a bug elsewhere... Segher ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensou

[XenPPC] Xen hangs

2006-09-25 Thread David M Daly
I'm running Xen on a JS21 and am using a straight xen_maple_defconfig for Dom0, both cloned from mercurial on xenbits. When I boot from nfsroot, sometimes Xen hangs. I've included a sample output below. I originally thought it was dependant on boot args passed to Xen and Dom0, but now I notice cha

[XenPPC] Xen on JS21 - Dom0 rootfs on SAN

2006-09-25 Thread David M Daly
I consistently get an error booting Dom0 from a SAN on JS21. I'm using xen_maple_defconfig + QLA2xxx device driver. With an nfsroot boot argument passed in, the system boots fine. With a root=/dev/nfs changed to root=/dev/sdc1 (a lun on the SAN), it mounts the root filesystem, and then fails wi

[XenPPC] Help with JS21 disk solution

2006-09-25 Thread Jimi Xenidis
If someone has a JS21 with SLES-10 on the disk, please try the following patch. It seems that I destroyed my filesystem on the blade in DE and need to wait till tomorrow to hare it restored. -JX diff -r acfb1ac23f80 xen/arch/powerpc/dart_u4.c --- a/xen/arch/powerpc/dart_u4.cMon Sep 25

Re: [XenPPC] JS20 does not boot with latest pull

2006-09-25 Thread Jimi Xenidis
uh oh. These are really old processor and may have SCOM issues those having a boot problem please comment out the body on cpu_scom_init() in: xen/arch/powerpc/powerpc64/ppc970_scom.c and see let me know if it works? -JX On Sep 25, 2006, at 5:52 PM, poff wrote: Verified booting problems on

[XenPPC] JS20 does not boot with latest pull

2006-09-25 Thread poff
Verified booting problems on JS20... Tail of serial output is below. (SOL is not available on this blade chassis.) Ping does not work, even after a few minutes. ... Xen version 3.0-unstable ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.4.1) Mon Sep 25 17:42:43 ED6 Latest ChangeSet: Mon Sep 25 11:19:55 20

[XenPPC] noHV status

2006-09-25 Thread Mark F Mergen
I can't attend the meeting and I haven't taken the time to figure out how to update my wiki status page (wasn't obvious, even after Hollis told me to login). I am again able to run Xen plus Linux on Mambo, after the few tcl tweaks suggested by others. I am up-to-date with integrating my noHV cha

[XenPPC] [xenppc-unstable] [XEN][POWERPC] Fix compile error in gdbstub.c

2006-09-25 Thread Xen patchbot-xenppc-unstable
# HG changeset patch # User Jimi Xenidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> # Node ID acfb1ac23f80286c8b532052f5e4b77f33612636 # Parent 0e83ba62a3a5c3b22ae99ebb6b6b7fe604ddb447 [XEN][POWERPC] Fix compile error in gdbstub.c With crash_debug=y the compiler can't find a prototype for unimplemented(), where gdb-arc

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] __trap_to_gdb should return something different

2006-09-25 Thread Keir Fraser
On 25/9/06 15:09, "Jimi Xenidis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is the code that cares: > > #ifdef CRASH_DEBUG > if (__trap_to_gdb(regs, cookie) == 0) > return; > #endif /* CRASH_DEBUG */ > > printk("%s: type: 0x%lx\n", __func__, cookie); > show_backtrace_regs(regs); >

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] __trap_to_gdb should return something different

2006-09-25 Thread Jimi Xenidis
On Sep 25, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Keir Fraser wrote: On 25/9/06 14:27, "Jimi Xenidis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Currently there are two failure cases: 1) GDB had no transport available for its use (UART or otherwise) 2) "unexpected trap", usually another trap occurs while gdb is in contr

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] __trap_to_gdb should return something different

2006-09-25 Thread Jimi Xenidis
On Sep 23, 2006, at 1:18 PM, Keir Fraser wrote: On 22/9/06 4:07 pm, "Jimi Xenidis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --text follows this line-- This patch allows the caller to find out if the gdbstub actually did anything. Signed-off-by: Jimi Xenidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> What different actions do

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] __trap_to_gdb should return something different

2006-09-25 Thread Keir Fraser
On 25/9/06 14:27, "Jimi Xenidis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Currently there are two failure cases: >1) GDB had no transport available for its use (UART or otherwise) >2) "unexpected trap", usually another trap occurs while gdb is in > control > > I suppose we could have (1) -EIO and