Bug#584846: Detects only 64MB and fails to boot on Intel Green City board if e820 hooked by GRUB2

2010-06-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 06/12/2010 05:07 PM, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 04:02:44PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 06/12/2010 03:26 PM, Josh Triplett wrote: >>> >>> Everything looks identical except for the region GRUB hooked right below >>> the first reser

Bug#584846: Detects only 64MB and fails to boot on Intel Green City board if e820 hooked by GRUB2

2010-06-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
g INT 15h even in the "unchained" case... -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troubl

Bug#584846: Detects only 64MB and fails to boot on Intel Green City board if e820 hooked by GRUB2

2010-06-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
area. Something else that really confuses me is that although the memory map has changed, the INT 15h vector itself is still the same, so I'm really confused about how the actual hooking happens in the first place... -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work

Bug#584846: Detects only 64MB and fails to boot on Intel Green City board if e820 hooked by GRUB2

2010-06-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
s specific hardware, it is hard for me to track down what the problem might be, but a good step on the way might be to use the Grub2 boot procedure (with the drive remapping) to chainboot Syslinux, and run meminfo.c32 which is a memory report debugging tool; it might be able to give some answers at leas

Bug#584846: Detects only 64MB and fails to boot on Intel Green City board if e820 hooked by GRUB2

2010-06-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
the same reasons the kernel do, and then pass then downstream to the kernel. As such, there is absolutely nothing the kernel can do about it. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to d

Bug#464962: Do AMD K7 family CPUs support long noops?

2008-02-13 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Graham wrote: Hello, I am wondering whether anyone has looked into which AMD CPUs support these instructions. I would think that installing a 486 kernel on an AthlonXP, for example, would be quite sub-optimal. i.e. can you safely enable X86_P6_NOP for other CPUs, such as AMD K7/K8, VIA C3/C7, o

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hpa/0001-x86-do-not-promote-TM3x00-TM5x00-to-i686-class.patch -hpa -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Bastian Blank wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:42:50PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Okay, the faulting instruction is the following: c0383360: 0f 1f 40 00 nopl 0x0(%eax) include/asm-x86/nops.h: | /* P6 nops */ | /* uses eax dependencies (Intel-recommended choice

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Bastian Blank wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:42:50PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: The Crusoe code morphing software apparently doesn't recognize these "long noops", and (presumably) the rest of the hinting NOOP group. gcc didn't use to generate them, and Crusoe/Effic

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Thought some more about this, and since this probably means gcc will generate this for userspace code as well nowadays, tm5800 should probably be downgraded to a 586-class machine. Hence the Linux policy of promoting it to a 686-class machine for having CMOV is actually incorrect, it doesn't h

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
maximilian attems wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:14:04PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Are you sure that build matches the bug report? urrgs right sorry, the posted vmlinux is a newer 2.6.24-git22 and not Version: 2.6.24-3 The EIP given falls inside the .data segment of that kernel

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
maximilian attems wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:14:04PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Are you sure that build matches the bug report? urrgs right sorry, the posted vmlinux is a newer 2.6.24-git22 and not Version: 2.6.24-3 The EIP given falls inside the .data segment of that kernel

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
maximilian attems wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:32:27PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: INT 6 is #UD, undefined instruction. If you could send me a copy of your vmlinux file (not bzImage), it would speed things up. cp -l src/linux-2.6-2.6.24/debian/build/build_i386_none_686/vmlinux

Bug#464962: immediate crash on boot on TM5800

2008-02-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
maximilian attems wrote: sure, ack. so i'll circumvent bugzilla and add the new x86 maintainers on cc to let them know about the 2.6.24 and 2.6.25-rc1 boot error on shiny fujitsu p700 lifebook, with a Crusoe processor. http://bugs.debian.org/464962 686 config attached. INT 6 is #UD, undefined

Bug#409271: [klibc] Bug#409271: initramfs-tools: NFSv4 not supported for root fs

2007-02-01 Thread H. Peter Anvin
maximilian attems wrote: [ adding klibc ml to cc ] On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 09:29:52AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: It appears to be largely undocumented, but a review of /usr/share/initramfs/scripts/nfs shows that this package supports NFSv2 and v3 only. I don't know why v4 isn't supported. yu