[Solved] Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 15:30 -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote: > Hi, > > I just built an amd box with a 5600+ processor on an MSI K9A Platinum > MB. The latest (as of yesterday) netinst version of debian-amd64 was > used to boot up the system. I saw none of the BIOS features which were > mentioned on the installation page as things which had to be disabled, > ran the memory up to 800 Mhz, etc., etc. > > The boot process times out when trying to communicate with the SATA > drives (I have 2 WD drives, both recognized by Windows when I installed > that later). The message given is along the lines of > > "ata.1: SATA drive failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error errmask=0x104)" ... Ah! What a delight! I retried this whole thing using the etch installer after seeing some information under a Google search for kernel support for the SB600 south bridge. (I was looking for help on setting up my own kernel's config.) Others have had similar problems as has been mentioned here, and a suggested workaround in one case included the boot parameters "pci=nomsi irqpoll" (which was a combo I had not tried). Worked like a charm for me as well. Etch was installed, which I changed to Sid (being slightly unstable myself :). I really appreciate the input I got from folks here. I have other questions, but those will come elsewhere. Cheers, Kenward -- With or without (religion) you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. --Physicist and Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:27:44PM -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote: > Isn't it possible to create one on a usb drive, or from a mount point > from which an ISO image can be generated? I was thinking of trying to > roll my own kernel, then replace the kernel in the current setup. > > Or is this being naive?? It is a bit tricky, and involves generating udebs with kernel-wedge, and regenerating the debian-installer udebs based on that along with updating the package lists on the cd. I have done it, and it was a bit of a pain, but not too bad. Way way simpler than the old boot-floppies system of 3.0 and earlier. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Monday 30 April 2007 19:29, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 01:14:10AM -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote: > > Thanks to you and Storm66 for your replies. I just burned and tried > > Ubuntu, Mepis, and Gentoo, and they all seemed to have no problems. The > > working kernel for the debian install was a 2.6.20. > > > > Is the sarge image based on 2.6.20 as well? You should be able to boot up with the Gentoo liveCD and use that to start the Debian installation manually -- from what I remember of my brief bout of infidelity, I don't think it needs the CD drive once it has booted. (If it does, try the Ubuntu or Mepis CDs; both of which are Debian underneath). Make sure your internet is working, though. Before the mid-install reboot, you will need to download and build an up-to-date kernel. (Or you could cheat and just copy the kernel from the boot CD; but you'd do best to build your own as soon as possible afterward.) -- AJS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 14:29 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 01:14:10AM -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote: > > Thanks to you and Storm66 for your replies. I just burned and tried > > Ubuntu, Mepis, and Gentoo, and they all seemed to have no problems. The > > working kernel for the debian install was a 2.6.20. > > > > Is the sarge image based on 2.6.20 as well? > > > > I'll check that link out too. > > Sarge is 2.6.8, etch is 2.6.18. http://kmuto.jp/debian/d-i/ has a > 2.6.12 based sarge image which has helped many people in the past with > installing sarge. Perhaps someone will make a 2.6.20 based etch > installer similar to the sarge 2.6.12 installer to help out people who > just have to have the latest and greatest in hardware. :) I did it > before for sarge, so who knows maybe at some point I will feel like > doing it again. > > -- > Len Sorensen Isn't it possible to create one on a usb drive, or from a mount point from which an ISO image can be generated? I was thinking of trying to roll my own kernel, then replace the kernel in the current setup. Or is this being naive?? Kenward -- With or without (religion) you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. --Physicist and Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 10:19:07AM +0200, michelcuppens wrote: > I had the same problem with a MSI K9MM-V MoBo .I solved it by manually > partitioning it, ie by determining the sizes and names myself (not using the > proposed ones by the installer). > Sata is treated as SCSI ,so the naming is sd(a...z)X Well, not quite. libata is treated as scsi and most sata drivers now use libata. Most PATA drivers are available as libata too in the recent 2.6 kernels. Basicaly in the future all harddrives will appear as scsi style disks. 2.4 had a number of SATA drivers that made /dev/hd* devices, but they quickly got replaced by libata which was a much better solution. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 01:14:10AM -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote: > Thanks to you and Storm66 for your replies. I just burned and tried > Ubuntu, Mepis, and Gentoo, and they all seemed to have no problems. The > working kernel for the debian install was a 2.6.20. > > Is the sarge image based on 2.6.20 as well? > > I'll check that link out too. Sarge is 2.6.8, etch is 2.6.18. http://kmuto.jp/debian/d-i/ has a 2.6.12 based sarge image which has helped many people in the past with installing sarge. Perhaps someone will make a 2.6.20 based etch installer similar to the sarge 2.6.12 installer to help out people who just have to have the latest and greatest in hardware. :) I did it before for sarge, so who knows maybe at some point I will feel like doing it again. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
Op zondag 29 april 2007 00:30, schreef Kenward Vaughan: > Hi, > > I just built an amd box with a 5600+ processor on an MSI K9A Platinum > MB. The latest (as of yesterday) netinst version of debian-amd64 was > used to boot up the system. I saw none of the BIOS features which were > mentioned on the installation page as things which had to be disabled, > ran the memory up to 800 Mhz, etc., etc. > > The boot process times out when trying to communicate with the SATA > drives (I have 2 WD drives, both recognized by Windows when I installed > that later). The message given is along the lines of > > "ata.1: SATA drive failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error errmask=0x104)" > > Other lines earlier in the boot included > > SATA max udma/133 cmd 0xC200ED00 crt 0x0 bmda 0x0 irq 1277 > and > SATA link SStatus 123 SControl 300 > > (I have no clue whether these are helpful, though.) > > This happens for all 4 slots (with only 2 being populated, of course). > I tried to get an idea of what people did with similar problems > (amdforums), and tried a variety of boot options (noapic nolapic; noapic > acpi=noirq|off ; etc.), none of which helped. > > One time I was able to shft-pgup and saw a line about a BIOS bug, along > with the letters MCFG, but I couldn't catch it again at other times. > Looking at dmesg later on following a normal boot showed no such line in > the part of dmesg which had been saved. > > It appears that most if not all other HW is recognized, including the > LAN. > > The K9A has the ATI RD580 north bridge chip and SB600 south bridge, and > is a Crossfire board (which I don't care about). The BIOS version is > 1.3 (Dec. '06). > > Is this likely a problem of not having the right support built into the > installation disk, and if so how can I get around that? > > Can I build an amd64 kernel on my 32 bit kernel machine and somehow > build a bootable disk off of that? (a flash drive perhaps?) > > > Many thanks for any help! > > > Kenward > -- > With or without (religion) you would have good people doing good things > and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil > things, that takes religion. --Physicist and Nobel Laureate Steven > Weinberg I had the same problem with a MSI K9MM-V MoBo .I solved it by manually partitioning it, ie by determining the sizes and names myself (not using the proposed ones by the installer). Sata is treated as SCSI ,so the naming is sd(a...z)X Hope it can help you. Michel Cuppens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 23:54 -0700, michael wrote: > On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 15:30:55 -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote > > Is this likely a problem of not having the right support built into the > > installation disk, and if so how can I get around that? > > > > I'm guessing your using the latest etch installer, which comes with a 2.6.18 > kernel. You might want to try a debian installer with a more recent kernel. > Perhaps something from here: > > http://kmuto.jp/debian/d-i/ > > Perhaps there is a custom etch installer out somewhere with 2.6.20 ? > > You could always install the sarge one from above and upgrade to etch > afterwards. > > hth, > > Mike Thanks to you and Storm66 for your replies. I just burned and tried Ubuntu, Mepis, and Gentoo, and they all seemed to have no problems. The working kernel for the debian install was a 2.6.20. Is the sarge image based on 2.6.20 as well? I'll check that link out too. Kenward -- With or without (religion) you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. --Physicist and Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
Le samedi 28 avril 2007 à 15:30 -0700, Kenward Vaughan a écrit : > Hi, > > I just built an amd box with a 5600+ processor on an MSI K9A Platinum > MB. The latest (as of yesterday) netinst version of debian-amd64 was > used to boot up the system. I saw none of the BIOS features which were > mentioned on the installation page as things which had to be disabled, > ran the memory up to 800 Mhz, etc., etc. > Hello, I had the same problem with another MB. The problem seems to be related to the SB600 chip. The only method I found to cope with is to use a kernel with the SATA support totally disabled and putting the chip (BIOS) in "Legacy IDE mode" if your BIOS has such an option. I guess that the kernel > 2.6.20 will work as some enhancements have been done in the kernel related to the SB600 chip. Another problem is that the SATA drives are not created whith /dev/hd... names but with /dev/sd If you can find an installer with a kernel > 2.6.20 I think that you will have a full working system without any problem. Regards Storm66 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SATA drives not recognized on new install
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 15:30:55 -0700, Kenward Vaughan wrote > Is this likely a problem of not having the right support built into the > installation disk, and if so how can I get around that? > I'm guessing your using the latest etch installer, which comes with a 2.6.18 kernel. You might want to try a debian installer with a more recent kernel. Perhaps something from here: http://kmuto.jp/debian/d-i/ Perhaps there is a custom etch installer out somewhere with 2.6.20 ? You could always install the sarge one from above and upgrade to etch afterwards. hth, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SATA drives not recognized on new install
Hi, I just built an amd box with a 5600+ processor on an MSI K9A Platinum MB. The latest (as of yesterday) netinst version of debian-amd64 was used to boot up the system. I saw none of the BIOS features which were mentioned on the installation page as things which had to be disabled, ran the memory up to 800 Mhz, etc., etc. The boot process times out when trying to communicate with the SATA drives (I have 2 WD drives, both recognized by Windows when I installed that later). The message given is along the lines of "ata.1: SATA drive failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error errmask=0x104)" Other lines earlier in the boot included SATA max udma/133 cmd 0xC200ED00 crt 0x0 bmda 0x0 irq 1277 and SATA link SStatus 123 SControl 300 (I have no clue whether these are helpful, though.) This happens for all 4 slots (with only 2 being populated, of course). I tried to get an idea of what people did with similar problems (amdforums), and tried a variety of boot options (noapic nolapic; noapic acpi=noirq|off ; etc.), none of which helped. One time I was able to shft-pgup and saw a line about a BIOS bug, along with the letters MCFG, but I couldn't catch it again at other times. Looking at dmesg later on following a normal boot showed no such line in the part of dmesg which had been saved. It appears that most if not all other HW is recognized, including the LAN. The K9A has the ATI RD580 north bridge chip and SB600 south bridge, and is a Crossfire board (which I don't care about). The BIOS version is 1.3 (Dec. '06). Is this likely a problem of not having the right support built into the installation disk, and if so how can I get around that? Can I build an amd64 kernel on my 32 bit kernel machine and somehow build a bootable disk off of that? (a flash drive perhaps?) Many thanks for any help! Kenward -- With or without (religion) you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. --Physicist and Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
