On Tue 09 Apr 2002, Donald R. Spoon wrote: > > This has been a persistant, but intermittant problem in other archs in
I assume you mean "all archs", not "other archs"? I came across this when I tried some version of the net install cdrom for i386 some time ago (1-3 months, I forget). very frustrating, I went back to a potato cdrom and apt-get dist-upgrade from there. > There are some earlier messages during the controller init about "CACHE > TEST FAILED: DMA error (dstat=0xa0). <3> CACHE Incorrectly Configured." > followed a couple of line later by "CACHE TEST FAILED: script execution > failed. Start 800F9414, pc=800F9414, end 800F9440". Strange thing is > that the source code for this particular driver indicates it hasn't been > changed in several years! It looks like something might be messed up in Argh, this has just woken up some memories that had been pushed back to the back of my mind, although I believe I came across it when upgrading to a nice new athlon system... Not sure though, it *might* have been on my alpha, or even some sparc somewhere. I actually don't think it was on my alpha, as that is still running 2.2.19pre7 which I built January 2001 (and nothing's happened in my kernel source directory there since then). All I can say is that I boot my athlon with this parameter: sym53c8xx=nvram:0x80,revprob:y because I have to set the "disabled" flag in the nvram (otherwise the boot BIOS hangs because there's not enough room for it to expand itself?!), but I *do* want to use it... I have no idea whether this may help. It may be that I'm using the sym53c8xx driver instead of ncr53c8xx because of the cache problem. > your experiences with getting this kernle to run. At this point I > really don't know if it is something I am doing wrong or if there is > something awry in the kernel source code for the XLT. Hmm, I'm getting pretty curious about this. Perhaps I should sacrifice my XLT's uptime for this :-) Paul Slootman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]