http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8034
------- Comment #19 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-18 12:53 -------
hi,
you wrote:
>
> Arne,
> Did it work for you with the above BIOS setting?
>
NO.
----------------------
About my situation:
I am only a "user" of Linux, and this was my first introduction to bugzilla.
Had no idea how to report, where, but felt forced to do it - as I have been
been 'ranting/screaming/etc' all over ;)
I am "out of date", both with hardware and current development culture.
In fact, I may need some tutoring.
Now some words about the bug report:
Description from Florian Delizy, did seem close to my results.
It is assigned to "ACPI", which also seem correct.
It relates to nVidia chips, serial ATA, and sofort.
( EU versus Microsoft, September 17th, 2007 - as that is somewhat linked
to this situation. The ACPI draft included Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Microsoft,
and Phoenix, Toshiba. But here we have "ACPI-2" (my invented term) So ?
It is the next frontier. )
As only Microsoft has keys to the BIOS, I have no way to do any settings.
Perhaps,
I am missing something ? ( configure options in the kernel ? )
At the moment I am running 2.6.23-0.184.rc6.git4.fc8, writing these words on
the
machine. But what a way to get it started:
- I toggle the power button, "interrupt" the system, - have to do it at the
right place,
and the right duration. May use several attempts.
Quote Florian's initial description: "...the kernel panics not finding any root
partition (it seems that sata_nv does not get initialized and does not probe
anything in the log)."
- this is what he 'sees' - the kernel hasn't started logging, and he only have
the messages that is displayed.
If you look at my entered comment #14 - section "Identical configured
kernels,..", it
gives some more info then Florian's example. ( it's difficult to remember, and
I have
lost the system...but..)
a:)
in /etc/grub.conf , I changed the kernel/vmlinux.... to verbose, instead of
quiet.
b:)
..hmm...could it be /etc/sysconfig ?? Anyway, there was a scsi file
or header, in which I changed a similar (?? -q) entry, to be (?? -v -v ) ,
perhaps even more detailed verbose report.
( Note: my ?? marks above could have been -r, just don't recall )
Because Opensuse will give a 'shell', instead of simply exit with a 'kernel
panic', I did
manage to get quite a bit of info, which also included memory contents for each
executed
command. But I had no media to save it to. Not even a serial port.
c:)
But what did this tell me ?
- the modules are loaded into memory, start executing - would first check the
primary drive, which it finds ( it made a file system in ram, installed modules
and system.
Opensuse simply quit here, instead of closing with a "kernel panic". )
It did boot the disk, but it will first check the rest of the file system,
CDROM, etc.
The drive has already stopped in order to save power, and perhaps you wanted to
run a live
CD instead ? A think a command 'resume' is given, and THIS is when it writes:
ata4: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300 ) // top of my first section
comment#14
( it is about here that I toggle the power button, and 'jump start it' - which
on
occation may be successful )
d:)
Something killed the machine, and I lost those kernels. Had some results at a
email-list,
which I copied to that bug-report. Got the message: MCP67M would be in
kernel2.6.22.6,
and Fedora had released F8t1. But at the moment, I have no kernel source to
work with,
and I am uncertain if I will dig into it. My programming skills are in much
doubt,
the time it may take me to become familar with it, well..what good would that
do ?
So, I had to give bugzilla an attempt. Sooner or later, I will have learn some
of it too.
e:)
This new "ACPI-2", well..it may not be anything new to you. But comparing
specs, and
other things, linux may have to decide upon either Intel or AMD, at a much
earlier
stage. I think that may be part of the plan. It's no problem for them - the OS
is preinstalled. However, this isn't the real obstacle for linux. It is other
aspects that
will be a closed door.
you wrote:
>
> Copying Tejun, this problem seems to be different from the one in original
> report. Might need a separate bugzilla.
>
Well, I don't know what you refere to here. But I suspect that there are
already
several different 'bugs' that doesn't seem related. My reason for the last
entry
above, as my impression is that "the right hand may not know what the left is
doing".
This last part may be some speculation on my part, but I think it should be
pretty
obvious what is on the horizon.
One last thing: perhaps if we compared actual models, and compared them - the
picture
would be easier to grasp ? ( it hasn't appeared all of a sudden, it is a
ongoing development )
//ARNE
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8034
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------- Comment #17 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-17 22:49 -------
Arne,
Did it work for you with the above BIOS setting?
Copying Tejun, this problem seems to be different from the one in original
report. Might need a separate bugzilla.
Fransois, can you provide more information? It would be better to have new
bugzilla open for your case also.
And I guess we are still awaiting a boot trace from Florian.
<br>hi,<br><br>you wrote:<br>><br>> Arne,<br>> Did it work for you
with the above BIOS
setting?<br>><br><br>NO.<br><br>
----------------------<br><br>About my situation:<br><br>I am only a "user" of
Linux, and this was my first introduction to bugzilla.<br>Had no idea how to
report, where, but felt forced to do it - as I have been<br>been
'ranting/screaming/etc' all over ;)<br>I am "out of date", both with hardware
and current development culture. <br><br>In fact, I may need some tutoring.
<br><br> <br>Now some words about the bug report:<br><br>Description from
Florian Delizy, did seem close to my results.<br>It is assigned to "ACPI",
which also seem correct.<br>It relates to nVidia chips, serial ATA, and
sofort. <br><br><br>( EU versus Microsoft, September 17th, 2007 - as that
is somewhat linked<br>to
this situation. The ACPI draft included Hewlett-Packard, Intel,
Microsoft,<br>and Phoenix, Toshiba. But here we have "ACPI-2" (my invented
term) So ?<br>It is the next frontier. ) <br><br>As only Microsoft has keys to
the BIOS, I have no way to do any settings. Perhaps,<br>I am missing
something ? ( configure options in the kernel ? )<br><br>At the moment I am
running 2.6.23-0.184.rc6.git4.fc8, writing these words on the<br>machine. But
what a way to get it started:<br><br>- I toggle the power button, "interrupt"
the system, - have to do it at the right place,<br>and the right duration. May
use several attempts. <br><br>Quote Florian's initial description: "...the
kernel panics not finding any root partition (it seems that sata_nv does not
get initialized and does not probe anything in the log)."<br><br>- this is what
he 'sees' - the kernel hasn't started logging, and he only have the messages
that is displayed. <br><br>If you look at my entered comment #14 - section
"Identical configured kernels,..", it<br>gives some more info then Florian's
example. ( it's difficult to remember, and I have <br>lost the
system...but..)<br><br>a:) <br>in /etc/grub.conf , I changed the
kernel/vmlinux.... to verbose, instead of quiet.<br><br>b:)<br>..hmm...could it
be /etc/sysconfig ?? Anyway, there was a scsi file<br>or header, in which I
changed a similar (?? -q) entry, to be (?? -v -v ) , <br>perhaps even
more detailed verbose report.<br>( Note: my ?? marks above could have been -r,
just don't recall )<br><br>Because Opensuse will give a 'shell', instead of
simply exit with a 'kernel panic', I did<br>manage to get quite a bit of info,
which also included memory contents for each executed<br>command. But I
had no media to save it to. Not even a serial port. <br><br>c:)<br>But
what did this tell me ?<br><br>- the modules are loaded into memory, start
executing - would first check the primary drive, which it finds ( it made a
file
system in ram, installed modules and system. <br>Opensuse simply quit here,
instead of closing with a "kernel panic". )<br>It did boot the disk, but it
will first check the rest of the file system, CDROM, etc.<br>The drive has
already stopped in order to save power, and perhaps you wanted to run a
live<br>CD instead ? A think a command 'resume' is given, and THIS is when it
writes: <br><br>ata4: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300 ) // top of my
first section comment#14 <br><br>( it is
about here that I toggle the power button, and 'jump start it' - which on
<br>occation may be successful )<br><br>d:)<br>Something killed the machine,
and I lost those kernels. Had some results at a email-list, <br>which I copied
to that bug-report. Got the message: MCP67M would be in kernel2.6.22.6,<br>and
Fedora had released F8t1. But at the moment, I have no kernel source to work
with,<br>and I am uncertain if I will dig into it. My programming
skills are in much doubt,<br>the time it may take me to become familar with
it, well..what good would that do ? <br>So, I had to give bugzilla an attempt.
Sooner or later, I will have learn some of it too.<br><br>e:)<br>This new
"ACPI-2", well..it may not be anything new to you. But comparing specs,
and<br>other things, linux may have to decide upon either Intel or AMD, at a
much earlier<br>stage. I think that may be part of the plan. It's no problem
for them - the OS is preinstalled. However, this isn't the real obstacle for
linux. It is other aspects that<br>will be a closed door. <br><br>you
wrote:<br>><br>> Copying Tejun, this problem seems to be different from
the one in original<br>> report. Might need a separate
bugzilla.<br>><br><br>Well, I don't know what you refere to here. But I
suspect that there are already<br>several different 'bugs' that doesn't seem
related. My reason for the last entry <br>above, as my impression is that "the
right hand may not
know what the left is doing".<br>This last part may be some speculation on my
part, but I think it should be pretty<br>obvious what is on the
horizon.<br><br>One last thing: perhaps if we compared actual models, and
compared them - the picture<br>would be easier to grasp ? ( it hasn't appeared
all of a sudden, it is a ongoing development
)<br><br>//ARNE<br><br><br><b><i>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</i></b>
wrote:<blockquote class="replbq" style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16,
255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8034<br><br><br>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
changed:<br><br> What |Removed
|Added<br>----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
CC|
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]<br><br><br><br><br>------- Comment #17 from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-17 22:49 -------<br>Arne,<br>Did it work for you
with the above BIOS
setting?<br>Copying Tejun, this problem seems to be different from the one in
original<br>report. Might need a separate bugzilla.<br>Fransois, can you
provide more information? It would be better to have new<br>bugzilla open for
your case also.<br>And I guess we are still awaiting a boot trace from
Florian.<br><br><br>-- <br>Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email<br>------- You are receiving
this mail because: -------<br>You are on the CC list for the bug, or are
watching someone who is.<br></blockquote><br><p> 
<hr size=1>Luggage? GPS? Comic books? <br>
Check out fitting <a
href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48249/*http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz";>
gifts for grads</a> at Yahoo! Search.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
acpi-bugzilla mailing list
acpi-bugzilla@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-bugzilla
