Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-09 Thread Helge Hafting
Sorry, that was a wrong .config file. Here is the right one, form the amd64 box: # # Automatically generated make config: don't edit # Linux kernel version: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 # Sat Mar 31 09:01:57 2007 # CONFIG_X86_64=y CONFIG_64BIT=y CONFIG_X86=y CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME=y CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL=y

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-09 Thread Helge Hafting
Here is my .config Sorry for the late reply, I have been on a holiday. # # Automatically generated make config: don't edit # Linux kernel version: 2.6.21-rc5-mm2 # Wed Mar 28 12:18:09 2007 # CONFIG_X86_32=y CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME=y CONFIG_CLOCKSOURCE_WATCHDOG=y CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS=y CONFIG_GENE

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-03 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 11:23:17PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> I guess at this point the easy case is that we modify /sbin/kexec to > >> support > >> it. And the other bootloaders can come be upgraded if the feature is > >> interesting enough.

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I guess at this point the easy case is that we modify /sbin/kexec to support >> it. And the other bootloaders can come be upgraded if the feature is >> interesting enough. >> >> > On i386, somebody already found an interesting usage of > CONFIG_PHYSICAL

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 04:59:26PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 04:49:14PM +0200 > > > > I used a working 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 tree, patched it up to 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 > > and applied your patch. I ended up with the .config later

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 11:26:38AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Only advantage of CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START seems to be that one has got > > capability to run the kernel from other addresses without modifying the > > boot-loader. One can argue that no

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Only advantage of CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START seems to be that one has got > capability to run the kernel from other addresses without modifying the > boot-loader. One can argue that now people should use a relocatable kernel > for such a feature. But for using

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread thunder7
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 04:49:14PM +0200 > > I used a working 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 tree, patched it up to 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 > and applied your patch. I ended up with the .config later in this email, > and got this error: > > CC arch/x86_64/kernel/head6

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread thunder7
From: Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 05:06:39PM +0530 > On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:17:45PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [..] > > > + /* > > > + * Make sure kernel is aligned to 2MB address. Catching it at compile > > > + * time is better. Change your config file a

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:17:45PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [..] > > + /* > > +* Make sure kernel is aligned to 2MB address. Catching it at compile > > +* time is better. Change your config file and compile the kernel > > +* for a 2MB aligned address (CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START) > >

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread thunder7
From: Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:11:59PM +0530 > > How about attached patch? > > o X86_64 kernel should run from 2MB aligned address for two reasons. > - Performance. > - For relocatable kernels, page tables are updated based on difference >

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 02:43:56AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 11:29:57PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:15:51 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) > > wrote: > >> > >> > Does anyone know h

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 11:29:57PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:15:51 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) > wrote: >> >> > Does anyone know how to express the constraint of a 2M aligned number in > Kconfig? >> >> Nope, bu

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-04-02 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 11:29:57PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:15:51 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) > wrote: > > > Does anyone know how to express the constraint of a 2M aligned number in > > Kconfig? > > Nope, but we could make CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START be in

Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-04-02 Thread Jan Beulich
>> [] __put_user_4+0x12/0x18 >> DWARF2 unwinder stuck at __put_user_4+0x12/0x18 >> Leftover inexact backtrace: >> [] ret_from_fork+0x6/0x1c > >Hmpf. I saw it once in child_rip here too. Then I wanted to reproduce it to >report >properly and couldn't again. I had a few other backtraces that were

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-04-01 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Sunday, 1 April 2007 22:39, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, 1 April 2007 21:03, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:00:12 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > Andrew Morton napisał(a): > > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patch

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-04-01 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Sunday, 1 April 2007 22:39, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, 1 April 2007 21:03, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:00:12 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > Andrew Morton napisał(a): > > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patch

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-04-01 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Sunday, 1 April 2007 21:03, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:00:12 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Andrew Morton napisał(a): > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ > > > > > > > BUG: at /mnt/md0/d

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-04-01 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:00:12 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Morton napisał(a): > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ > > > > BUG: at /mnt/md0/devel/linux-mm/arch/i386/kernel/smp.c:571 > native_smp_call_function_

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-04-01 Thread Michal Piotrowski
Andrew Morton napisał(a): > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ > BUG: at /mnt/md0/devel/linux-mm/arch/i386/kernel/smp.c:571 native_smp_call_function_mask() [] dump_trace+0x63/0x1eb [] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30 [] show_trace+0x12/0x14 [

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-03-31 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:15:51 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > Does anyone know how to express the constraint of a 2M aligned number in > Kconfig? Nope, but we could make CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START be in units of 2MB, which would be a bit hard to use. Adding a BUILD_BUG_ON which c

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-03-31 Thread Eric W. Biederman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I had the same with this .config from 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 after running 'make > oldconfig' and answering N to all new questions. Then, I tweaked some > items, mostly to see if there was an 'align kernel' item in there > somewhere. Diff between _working_ 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 .confi

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-03-31 Thread thunder7
From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 12:53:03AM -0700 > On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 09:12:20 +0200 Helge Hafting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > A new error for me: > > > > loading 2.6.21rc5mm3 > > Bios data check successful > > Destination address not 2M aligned > > -- Sy

Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-31 Thread Michal Piotrowski
On 31/03/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Were there any strange binutils in use, Michal? I don't remember when I had problems with this compiler. ^^^ (sorry, to many bottles of beer) ld --version GNU ld version 2.17.50.0.6-2.fc6 20061020 Regards, Michal -- Michal K. K.

Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-31 Thread Michal Piotrowski
Andi Kleen napisał(a): >> BUG: NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU0, eip c014ce9c, registers: > > I suspect it is just because his console is too slow and then unwinding > took too long and it happened to hit the unwinder. > > You did use a slow console, right? console=ttyS0,115200n8 > > I su

Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-31 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [] ret_from_fork+0x6/0x1c > > Hmpf. I saw it once in child_rip here too. Then I wanted to reproduce > it to report properly and couldn't again. I had a few other backtraces > that were all non stuck with child_rip then on essentially the same > ker

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-03-31 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 09:12:20 +0200 Helge Hafting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> A new error for me: >> >> loading 2.6.21rc5mm3 >> Bios data check successful >> Destination address not 2M aligned >> -- System halted >> >> >> This is using the same li

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-03-30 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 09:12:20 +0200 Helge Hafting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A new error for me: > > loading 2.6.21rc5mm3 > Bios data check successful > Destination address not 2M aligned > -- System halted > > > This is using the same lilo that loads 2.6.18rc5mm1 fine. > x86-64 > That's ne

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 - no boot, "address not 2M aligned"

2007-03-30 Thread Helge Hafting
A new error for me: loading 2.6.21rc5mm3 Bios data check successful Destination address not 2M aligned -- System halted This is using the same lilo that loads 2.6.18rc5mm1 fine. x86-64 Helge Hafting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a mess

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3: fix e1000 compilation

2007-03-30 Thread David Miller
From: "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:27:50 -0700 > turns out that NETIF_F_TSO6 is defined even if CONFIG_IPV6 is turned > off, which is what broke e1000. That in itself might be a > problem. Perhaps this should be fixed in netdevice.h (gratuitous bad > inline patch below

Re: Fw: Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Andi Kleen
> > BUG: NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU0, eip c014ce9c, registers: I suspect it is just because his console is too slow and then unwinding took too long and it happened to hit the unwinder. You did use a slow console, right? I suppose it just needs a strategic touch_nmi_watchdog. Will ad

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Johannes Berg
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 13:23 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:59 PDT, Andrew Morton said: > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ > > Building with CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS=y but CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUG_COUNTERS=n > blows

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3: fix e1000 compilation

2007-03-30 Thread Kok, Auke
Randy Dunlap wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:01:04 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:39:04 -0700 "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Alexey Dobriyan wrote: CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.o drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c: In function 'e1000_tso': drivers/net/e1000/e10

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:59 PDT, Andrew Morton said: > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ Building with CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS=y but CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUG_COUNTERS=n blows chunks on my box: CC [M] net/mac80211/debugfs.o net/mac80211/debug

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Michal Piotrowski
Ingo Molnar napisał(a): > * Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It's my lucky Friday, kernel hangs shortly after >> >> PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcsa1 >> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcs1 >> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa1 >> PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcs1 >> PM: Removing info f

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3: fix e1000 compilation

2007-03-30 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:01:04 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:39:04 -0700 "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.o > > > drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c: In function 'e1000_tso': > > > drivers/net/e1000/e1

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3: fix e1000 compilation

2007-03-30 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:39:04 -0700 "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.o > > drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c: In function 'e1000_tso': > > drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c:2968: error: dereferencing pointer to > > incomplete type

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:38:11 -0400 "Dmitry Torokhov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/30/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ > > > > - git-cryptodev has things in it again > > > > - Re-added

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's my lucky Friday, kernel hangs shortly after > > PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcsa1 > PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcs1 > PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa1 > PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcs1 > PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcsa1 > PM: Adding info

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Dmitry Torokhov
On 3/30/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ - git-cryptodev has things in it again - Re-added git-e1000: a large amount of e1000 driver work - git-net has a huge amount of material in it, but I d

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Michal Piotrowski
On 30/03/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ It's my lucky Friday, kernel hangs shortly after PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcsa1 PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcs1 PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa1

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3: fix e1000 compilation

2007-03-30 Thread Alexey Dobriyan
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 07:39:04AM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote: > Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.o > >drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c: In function 'e1000_tso': > >drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c:2968: error: dereferencing pointer to > >incomplete type > > ... > > > >

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3: fix e1000 compilation

2007-03-30 Thread Kok, Auke
Alexey Dobriyan wrote: CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.o drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c: In function 'e1000_tso': drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c:2968: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type ... can you send me your config? I'd like to see why nobody here didn't spot th

Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3

2007-03-30 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, 30 March 2007 10:05, Andrew Morton wrote: > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/ > > - git-cryptodev has things in it again > > - Re-added git-e1000: a large amount of e1000 driver work > > - git-net has a huge amount of material