> Yes i did because except for the address, > everything else was identical. > There was NO name following the msg path.Infact there > is a blank line ,but when i did step through the code > ,even after the panic happened and i did a > rootfs::print ,the correct value for bo_name showed > up...however there is a field called bo_devname that > was showing 0's throughout... > > Another thing - is it possible that the opensolaris > src code is not the same as the one running off the CD > ? I know it is different in some of the other layers > like the SCSA stack etc
Yep, in S10u4 the "cannot mount root path" panic is printing |svm_bootpath|, and not |rootfs.bo_name|. That was changed in revision 3446 (19-Jan-2007) of the vfs.c source file: http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/history/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/fs/v fs.c http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/diff/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/fs/vfs. c?r2=%2Fonnv%2Fonnv-gate%2Fusr%2Fsrc%2Futs%2Fcommon%2Ffs%2Fvfs.c%403446&r1=%2Fon nv%2Fonnv-gate%2Fusr%2Fsrc%2Futs%2Fcommon%2Ffs%2Fvfs.c%402621 I guess it is failing somewhere inside usr/src/uts/i86pc/os/ddi_impl.c, getrootdev(), maybe returning NODEV here: dev_t getrootdev(void) { /* * Precedence given to rootdev if set in /etc/system */ if (root_is_svm == B_TRUE) { return (ddi_pathname_to_dev_t(svm_bootpath)); } /* * Usually rootfs.bo_name is initialized by the * the bootpath property from bootenv.rc, but * defaults to "/ramdisk:a" otherwise. */ return (ddi_pathname_to_dev_t(rootfs.bo_name)); } _______________________________________________ driver-discuss mailing list driver-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/driver-discuss
