On 5/13/21 4:49 AM, Rich wrote:
> I'm mostly curious about whether anyone knows why the Call Trace might
> be empty - I see the message about corrupted stack end above it, but
> from what I can see online, plenty of people get that message and a
> call trace printout below it (...on other
Hi all,
So, I got my earlier system running sparc64 using a terrible method
(from inside the existing sparc install, mount -o remount,ro /; nc -l
| dd of=/dev/sda [...] an image generated in a VM, reboot and pray),
but now I'm doing the thing I actually wanted a sparc64 system for
(testing a
Hello Rich,
> > On 5/9/21 3:24 PM, Rich wrote:
> > > I tried just handing it vmlinux from
> > > https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-installer/2021-04-17/sparc64/debian-installer-images_20210415_sparc64.tar.gz
> > > over TFTP, but that just dies with "fast Data Access MMU Miss" before
bHi Adrian!
On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 9:26 AM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> Hello Rich!
>
> On 5/9/21 3:24 PM, Rich wrote:
> > I tried just handing it vmlinux from
> > https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-installer/2021-04-17/sparc64/debian-installer-images_20210415_sparc64.tar.gz
Hello Rich!
On 5/9/21 3:24 PM, Rich wrote:
> I tried just handing it vmlinux from
> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-installer/2021-04-17/sparc64/debian-installer-images_20210415_sparc64.tar.gz
> over TFTP, but that just dies with "fast Data Access MMU Miss" before
> ever
Hi!
(Forgive me if this is well-answered somewhere, but I did some
searching, and did not come upon it.)
I have a Netra T1 running the old Debian sparc port. I wanted to
reinstall it with the sparc64 port, but it does not have a cdrom, and
I do not seem to grasp how to netboot the Debian
On 4/19/21 08:31, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 4/19/21 2:13 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> I have done some testing with an old Netra server and everything seems
>> fine with the exception of gdb which is broken. Seems to be fixed for
>> the gdb 10.2 release which is coming any day real
On 4/19/21 2:13 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> I have done some testing with an old Netra server and everything seems
> fine with the exception of gdb which is broken. Seems to be fixed for
> the gdb 10.2 release which is coming any day real soon now :
>
> Bug 27750 - local variables have wrong
On 4/14/21 5:07 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I just uploaded updated Debian Ports installation images that were
> created today and ship with the latest Debian unstable kernel (5.10)
> and all other packages updated to their latest version in Debian
> unstable.
>
> If you
Hello!
I just uploaded updated Debian Ports installation images that were
created today and ship with the latest Debian unstable kernel (5.10)
and all other packages updated to their latest version in Debian
unstable.
If you test these images, please let me know if you run into any issues.
Hi Anatoly!
Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
> current grub2 version does not support compressed image kernels, do
> the following:
>
> gzip -dc /boot/vmlinuz-5.12.0-rc5+ > /boot/vmlinux-5.12.0-rc5+
> rm /boot/vmlinuz-5.12.0-rc5+
> update-grub
>
> and reboot
oh yes, that was it. Finally, I could boot my
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:40 PM Riccardo Mottola
wrote:
> multix@narya:~/code/linux-stable$ time sudo make install
> sh ./arch/sparc/boot/install.sh 5.12.0-rc5+ arch/sparc/boot/zImage \
> System.map "/boot"
> run-parts: executing /etc/kernel/postinst.d/apt-auto-removal 5.12.0-rc5+
>
Hi Riccardo,
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:43:29PM +0200, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> > Yep, in your kernel config set:
> > CONFIG_SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYS=""
>
> thanks, that was it! Now the kernel build
great!
> Do I need to do somethings special?
>
> make install
> make modules_install
sorry, don't
Hhi Hermann,
hermann.la...@uni-heidelberg.de wrote:
> Yep, in your kernel config set:
> CONFIG_SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYS=""
thanks, that was it! Now the kernel build
Do I need to do somethings special?
make install
make modules_install
Which shows:
multix@narya:~/code/linux-stable$ time sudo make
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 12:59 PM Riccardo Mottola
wrote:
> > This seems to only happen when the machines do a long run with high
> > workload and seemingly not when i just power them off again for night
> > with no high workload.
>
> I have a limited experience and can only share that the kernel I
Hi Connor,
Connor McLaughlan wrote:
> can anyone possible give a list of known stable kernel versions for
> SPARC machines? (is there a difference necessary between
> architectures/old vs. newer machines? sun4u/sun4v)?
>
> Also this instability manifests such that the machine is crashing
> during
Hi Riccardo,
On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 01:16:11PM -0600, Stan Johnson wrote:
> > I took the config out of /boot/config of a good kernel, updated it with
> > "make oldconfig"
> >
> > During compilation I see:
> >
> > CC init/init_task.o
> > make[1]: *** No rule to make target
> >
Hi Riccardo,
On 3/26/21 6:21 PM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> Hi,
> ...
>
> I cloned linux stable. It took 60 minutes...
>
> I took the config out of /boot/config of a good kernel, updated it with
> "make oldconfig"
>
> During compilation I see:
>
> CC init/init_task.o
> make[1]: *** No
Hi,
I was unable to "hack" for some days due to day-job. I have seen Frank
and others have done a great deal.
Still, I wanted to try my own compilation, as a first attempt and also
to build and be able to check eventual patches myself.
On 3/11/21 11:56 PM, Gregor Riepl wrote:
You should
I have to admit I'm completely lost at this point. This new trace looks
totally strange to me, and I'm pretty sure whatever symptoms you see are
due to different alignments / code sections etc just triggered by the
removal, we need help from the real sparc experts.
On 24.03.21 17:33, Frank Scheiner wrote:
On 24.03.21 17:10, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:58:39PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
[ 20.090279] [<006c6494>] sys_mount+0x114/0x1e0
[ 20.090338] [<006c6454>] sys_mount+0xd4/0x1e0
[ 20.090499]
On 24.03.21 17:10, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:58:39PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
[ 20.090279] [<006c6494>] sys_mount+0x114/0x1e0
[ 20.090338] [<006c6454>] sys_mount+0xd4/0x1e0
[ 20.090499] [<00406274>] linux_sparc_syscall+0x34/0x44
[
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:58:39PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> [ 20.090279] [<006c6494>] sys_mount+0x114/0x1e0
> [ 20.090338] [<006c6454>] sys_mount+0xd4/0x1e0
> [ 20.090499] [<00406274>] linux_sparc_syscall+0x34/0x44
> [ 20.090697] Disabling lock debugging due
On 24.03.21 16:22, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Wednesday 2021-03-24 14:57, Frank Scheiner wrote:
(gdb) l *(sys_mount+0x114/0x1e0)
0x6c6380 is in __se_sys_mount (fs/namespace.c:3390).
/0x1e0 does not normally belong there. Just
l *(sys_mount+0x114)
I guess this comes from my log
On Wednesday 2021-03-24 14:57, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> (gdb) l *(sys_mount+0x114/0x1e0)
> 0x6c6380 is in __se_sys_mount (fs/namespace.c:3390).
/0x1e0 does not normally belong there. Just
l *(sys_mount+0x114)
On 24.03.21 09:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:17:41PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565
...is broken on my T1000.
As I don't know how big attachments can be on this list, I put the logs
on pastebin.
A log for 028abd9222df is here:
On 24.03.21 14:24, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 4:19 PM Frank Scheiner wrote:
On 24.03.21 14:16, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 3/24/21 2:09 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:> Kernel sources are not available on
the T1000.
If need be, where do they need to exist and how
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 4:19 PM Frank Scheiner wrote:
> On 24.03.21 14:16, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > On 3/24/21 2:09 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:> Kernel sources are not available
> > on the T1000.
> >>
> >> If need be, where do they need to exist and how should the directory be
> >>
On 24.03.21 14:16, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 3/24/21 2:09 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:> Kernel sources are not available on
the T1000.
If need be, where do they need to exist and how should the directory be
named - `/usr/src/[...]`?
Try installing "linux-source" and the "-dbg"
On 3/24/21 2:09 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:> Kernel sources are not available on
the T1000.
>
> If need be, where do they need to exist and how should the directory be
> named - `/usr/src/[...]`?
Try installing "linux-source" and the "-dbg" package for your Debian kernel.
Adrian
--
.''`.
On 24.03.21 09:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:17:41PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565
...is broken on my T1000.
As I don't know how big attachments can be on this list, I put the logs
on pastebin.
A log for 028abd9222df is
Hello Frank!
On 3/24/21 1:30 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> Sorry, but I can't install `gdb` on my T1000 ATM, because it depends on
> "libpython3.8" for sparc64 (see [1]) and "libpython3.9" for the other
> architectures, but "libpython3.8" is actually not available for sparc64,
> "libpython3.9" is
On 24.03.21 13:42, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 3:31 PM Frank Scheiner wrote:
Sorry, but I can't install `gdb` on my T1000 ATM, because it depends on
"libpython3.8" for sparc64 (see [1]) and "libpython3.9" for the other
architectures, but "libpython3.8" is actually not
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 3:31 PM Frank Scheiner wrote:
> Sorry, but I can't install `gdb` on my T1000 ATM, because it depends on
> "libpython3.8" for sparc64 (see [1]) and "libpython3.9" for the other
> architectures, but "libpython3.8" is actually not available for sparc64,
> "libpython3.9" is
On 24.03.21 09:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:17:41PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565
...is broken on my T1000.
As I don't know how big attachments can be on this list, I put the logs
on pastebin.
A log for 028abd9222df is here:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:17:41PM +0100, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> 028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565
>
> ...is broken on my T1000.
>
> As I don't know how big attachments can be on this list, I put the logs
> on pastebin.
>
> A log for 028abd9222df is here:
>
> https://pastebin.com/ApPYsMcu
On 23.03.21 17:57, Christoph Hellwig wrote:> Frank, can you double check
that commit
67e306c6906137020267eb9bbdbc127034da3627 really still works, and
only 028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565 broke your setup?
So I manually checked out both 67e306c6906137020267eb9bbdbc127034da3627
and
On 23.03.21 17:57, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 05:50:59PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Some participants in the discussion over at the debian-sparc list mentioned
"NFS" and "Invalid argument", which is something I know just too well from
iptables. NFS is a filesystem that
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 05:50:59PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Some participants in the discussion over at the debian-sparc list mentioned
> "NFS" and "Invalid argument", which is something I know just too well from
> iptables. NFS is a filesystem that uses an extra data blob (5th argument to
Hi,
On 23.03.21 17:30, Connor McLaughlan wrote:
Hi,
can anyone possible give a list of known stable kernel versions for
SPARC machines? (is there a difference necessary between
architectures/old vs. newer machines? sun4u/sun4v)?
Also this instability manifests such that the machine is
On Monday 2021-03-22 22:55, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>>> Riccardo Mottola first recognized a problem with 5.10.x kernels on his
>>> Sun T2000 with UltraSPARC T1 (details in [this thread]). I could verify
>>> the problem also on my Sun T1000 and it looks like this specific issue
>>> breaks the
Hi,
can anyone possible give a list of known stable kernel versions for SPARC
machines? (is there a difference necessary between architectures/old vs.
newer machines? sun4u/sun4v)?
Also this instability manifests such that the machine is crashing during
high workload? (halting? rebooting?)
I
Hi Jan,
On 23.03.21 16:36, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Tuesday 2021-03-23 16:29, Frank Scheiner wrote:
```
[...]
Begin: Retrying nfs mount ... [ 41.753937] NFS: mount program didn't
pass remote address
mount: Invalid argument
I seem to recall that NFS is one of those filesystems that (a)
On Tuesday 2021-03-23 16:29, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>>
>> while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I
>> get not a bootable system. The kernel appears to crash very early during
>> boot.
>
> From my current testing it looks like "UltraSPARC IIIi"s are also
> affected by
Hi all,
On 09.03.21 13:23, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
Hi all,
while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I
get not a bootable system. The kernel appears to crash very early during
boot.
Anybody else has this issue?
Booting `Debian GNU/Linux'
Loading Linux
Hi,
On 22.03.21 22:48, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 3/22/21 10:30 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
Riccardo Mottola first recognized a problem with 5.10.x kernels on his
Sun T2000 with UltraSPARC T1 (details in [this thread]). I could verify
the problem also on my Sun T1000 and it looks like
Hello!
On 3/22/21 10:30 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> Riccardo Mottola first recognized a problem with 5.10.x kernels on his
> Sun T2000 with UltraSPARC T1 (details in [this thread]). I could verify
> the problem also on my Sun T1000 and it looks like this specific issue
> breaks the mounting of
Dear all,
Riccardo Mottola first recognized a problem with 5.10.x kernels on his
Sun T2000 with UltraSPARC T1 (details in [this thread]). I could verify
the problem also on my Sun T1000 and it looks like this specific issue
breaks the mounting of the root FS or maybe mounting file systems at
Hi Adrian,
On 17.03.21 13:39, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 3/17/21 1:22 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
```
johndoe@x4270:~/git-projects/torvalds/linux$ git bisect bad
028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565 is the first bad commit
[...]
Did you verify that reverting this commit or - if
Hi Frank!
On 3/17/21 1:22 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> Hi Adrian, Riccardo
>
> so I'm finished with bisecting and it points to the following commit as
> first bad commit:
>
> ```
> johndoe@x4270:~/git-projects/torvalds/linux$ git bisect bad
> 028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565 is the first
Hi Adrian, Riccardo
so I'm finished with bisecting and it points to the following commit as
first bad commit:
```
johndoe@x4270:~/git-projects/torvalds/linux$ git bisect bad
028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565 is the first bad commit
commit 028abd9222df0cf5855dab5014a5ebaf06f90565
Author:
Hi Adrian,
On 16.03.21 14:27, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Hello Frank!
On 3/16/21 2:07 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
After a first cross compile run, I can confirm that 5.10-rc1 is also
broken on my T1000. I'll take this version (parent commit:
33def8498fdde180023444b08e12b72a9efed41d) as
Hello Frank!
On 3/16/21 2:07 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> After a first cross compile run, I can confirm that 5.10-rc1 is also
> broken on my T1000. I'll take this version (parent commit:
> 33def8498fdde180023444b08e12b72a9efed41d) as "bad". But taking v5.9 as
> good means more than 5000 commits
Hi again,
On 16.03.21 14:07, Frank Scheiner wrote:
@Adrian:
After a first cross compile run, I can confirm that 5.10-rc1 is also
broken on my T1000. I'll take this version (parent commit:
33def8498fdde180023444b08e12b72a9efed41d) as "bad". But taking v5.9 as
good means more than 5000 commits in
Hi Riccardo, Adrian,
so I did some testing yesterday and also see your problem on my T1000.
Because of some kernel command line misconfiguration, my machine at
first couldn't find its root FS as it tried to use a non-existent NIC.
This lead to a lot of kernel oopses (I assume at least one per
On 3/15/21 9:38 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On 3/15/21 10:34 AM, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
>>> + /usr/sbin/grub-probe --target=device /
>>> + GRUB_DEVICE=/dev/sda2
>>> + /usr/sbin/grub-probe --device /dev/sda2 --target=fs_uuid
>>> [ 1330.951329] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup -
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:27 PM Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>
> I have seen this for a few months now. The old old netra machine will
> run just fine endlessly but if I attempt to perform a package update
> then I am always assured to see :
>
>
> ceres# apt-get update
> Get:1
Hello!
On 3/15/21 10:34 AM, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
>> + /usr/sbin/grub-probe --target=device /
>> + GRUB_DEVICE=/dev/sda2
>> + /usr/sbin/grub-probe --device /dev/sda2 --target=fs_uuid
>> [ 1330.951329] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s!
>> [grub-probe:443]
>> [ 1331.046350]
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 4:59 AM Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>
> While digging around here I saw that update-grub will lead to a lockup
> every time. So I simply changed /usr/sbin/grub-mkconfig script to
> allow me to see everything that happens.
>
> That gets me to :
>
> /usr/sbin/grub-probe
While digging around here I saw that update-grub will lead to a lockup
every time. So I simply changed /usr/sbin/grub-mkconfig script to
allow me to see everything that happens.
That gets me to :
/usr/sbin/grub-probe --device /dev/sda2 --target=fs_uuid
which falls to pieces perfectly :
On 3/14/21 5:52 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 3/14/21 6:48 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>>> So, if, for example, you want to verify that the memory is okay, you should
>>> run
>>> a memtest program.
>>
>> ...the built-in (memory) diagnostics of Sun machines are pretty
>> thorough. This
On 3/14/21 6:48 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>> So, if, for example, you want to verify that the memory is okay, you should
>> run
>> a memtest program.
>
> ...the built-in (memory) diagnostics of Sun machines are pretty
> thorough. This is not a PC. :-)
I doubt that the hardware runs a thorough
On 14.03.21 18:21, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 3/14/21 5:55 PM, Mike Tremaine wrote:
Let’s assume it’s not hardware, Dennis has posted the tests and states
the machine ran Sol10 fine.
The fact that Solaris runs fine can be an indicator the hardware is okay, but
it's not a proper
On 3/14/21 5:55 PM, Mike Tremaine wrote:
> Let’s assume it’s not hardware, Dennis has posted the tests and states
> the machine ran Sol10 fine.
The fact that Solaris runs fine can be an indicator the hardware is okay, but
it's not a proper verification that it's actually the case.
For example,
Let’s assume it’s not hardware, Dennis has posted the tests and states the
machine ran Sol10 fine. My only ideas are
1) Try using apt to update some individual packages to see if that even works.
Try dash and bash and whatever but avoid Systemd and any related libraries.
2a) If those succeed
Hi Dennis,
On 13.03.21 20:21, Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 3/13/21 5:29 PM, Mike Tremaine wrote:
On Mar 12, 2021, at 5:56 AM,
Dennis Clarke wrote:
[...]
I did sent a BRK to the serial port and that drops us into the firmware
"ok" prompt. There is a failed fan but in fact the fan is entirely not
On 3/13/21 5:29 PM, Mike Tremaine wrote:
>> On Mar 12, 2021, at 5:56 AM,
>> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> I have seen this for a few months now. The old old netra machine will
>> run just fine endlessly but if I attempt to perform a package update
>> then I am always assured to see :
> What kernel
ADDED: I wonder if it’s systemd specifically that causes this for you based on
the console output.
I have this in dmesg which matches the start of your output.
[Mar13 09:26] systemd[1]: systemd 247.3-3 running in system mode. (+PAM +AUDIT
+SELINUX +IMA +APPARMOR +SMACK +SYSVINIT +UTMP
> On Mar 12, 2021, at 5:56 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>
> I have seen this for a few months now. The old old netra machine will
> run just fine endlessly but if I attempt to perform a package update
> then I am always assured to see :
>
>
What kernel are you on? I do not have a Netra handy
I have seen this for a few months now. The old old netra machine will
run just fine endlessly but if I attempt to perform a package update
then I am always assured to see :
ceres# apt-get update
Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian-ports sid InRelease [55.3 kB]
Get:2
On Thursday 2021-03-11 23:43, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>>
>> Do you know if I can via serial-console reset the system?
>
> Reset from the serial console might work via the kernel with the [magic
> system request] functionality.
>
> [magic system request]:
>
> How should I proceed? Which kernel sources?
>
> https://kernel-team.pages.debian.net/kernel-handbook/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official
>
>
> is 4.3 correct for me? 4.6 ?
You should clone the upstream Git repo, otherwise bisecting will be much
more difficult.
I think these instructions
Hi Riccardo,
On 11.03.21 23:03, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
Hi Frank!
I suppose the Niagara CPU gives the kernel issue
From [1] I assume T2 CPUs are not affected, but yeah, the issue could
be that selective that it only affects the very first generation.
[1]:
> Do you know if I can via serial-console reset the system?
> I tried sending a break on the serial console, but the errors just keep
> running.
> Break is received, since I see it as SC Alert, but I am not put into the
> console, maybe there is some further trick on these newer machine? I am
>
Hi Adrian
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Well, that doesn't really help you though. You want to find the commit in
question,
just the range isn't enough to solve the issue.
Well, a little bit it helped, it is something early in the 5.10 series.
Also I have now an apparently working kernel
Hi Frank!
I suppose the Niagara CPU gives the kernel issue
Frank Scheiner wrote:
If I remember there was a repository with many snapshots of different
versions, already as package, which one can test quickly. That way we
can restrict breakage range without git bisect.
Do you have a link?
I
On 3/10/21 10:17 AM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> If I remember there was a repository with many snapshots of different
> versions,
> already as package, which one can test quickly. That way we can restrict
> breakage
> range without git bisect.
Well, that doesn't really help you though. You want
Hi Riccardo,
On 10.03.21 10:17, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
Frank Scheiner wrote:
We have an older UltraSPARC IIIi that has issues with newer kernels, but
usually only after longer operation and the issue might be related to
the
bug that was just fixed recently by Rob Gardner.
Which kernel
Hi Frank,
Frank Scheiner wrote:
We have an older UltraSPARC IIIi that has issues with newer kernels, but
usually only after longer operation and the issue might be related to the
bug that was just fixed recently by Rob Gardner.
Which kernel version will have this bug (which one?) fixed,
On 3/9/21 11:20 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> Which kernel version will have this bug (which one?) fixed, 5.11.x? I
>> can also check with one of my UltraSPARC IIIi powered systems, too, next
>> week.
>
> I have not uploaded that kernel yet, I have it built locally, PR here [1].
The
On 3/9/21 10:18 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>> The oldest buildd we are running is a T5120 and that's a T2.
>
> And these don't show the problems Riccardo's T1 powered T2000 has?
No, the machine runs stable.
>> We have an older UltraSPARC IIIi that has issues with newer kernels, but
>> usually
On 09.03.21 22:09, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 3/9/21 9:38 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
I have a T1000 with which I could try to reproduce Riccardo's issues.
Hardware wise they should be pretty similar. As the T1000 doesn't have a
CDROM, I'll try to netboot a few newer kernels and report
On 3/9/21 9:38 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> I have a T1000 with which I could try to reproduce Riccardo's issues.
> Hardware wise they should be pretty similar. As the T1000 doesn't have a
> CDROM, I'll try to netboot a few newer kernels and report my findings.
> Will take me until next week
Hi guys,
On 09.03.21 18:31, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Hi!
On 3/9/21 6:26 PM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I get not a
bootable
system. The kernel appears to crash very early during boot.
Hi!
On 3/9/21 6:26 PM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>>> while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I get
>>> not a bootable
>>> system. The kernel appears to crash very early during boot.
>> I think this is more likely a hardware issue. We
Hi,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I get not a
bootable
system. The kernel appears to crash very early during boot.
I think this is more likely a hardware issue. We haven't seen any machines
crashing that
early. Please
Hi Adrian
the world is small between SPARC and PPC :)
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
2020-11-16 -> this one worked! (but system is unbootable due to crash, of that
in a second mail)
This sounds like a hardware problem. The newer images should all work on
sparc64 with a few
images that
Hello Riccardo!
On 3/9/21 1:23 PM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I get not
> a bootable
> system. The kernel appears to crash very early during boot.
I think this is more likely a hardware issue. We haven't seen any machines
Hi all,
while I was able to "install" correctly using a slightly older ISO, I
get not a bootable system. The kernel appears to crash very early during
boot.
Anybody else has this issue?
Booting `Debian GNU/Linux'
Loading Linux 5.10.0-4-sparc64-smp ...
Loading initial ramdisk ...
[
Hello!
On 3/9/21 12:28 PM, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> I tried hard installing Debian/sparc64, it was not easy at all and haven't
> concluded.
>
> The T2000 I started from had Linux already installed, with an older 4.x
> series kernel,
> I'd guess not updated since 3 years. It was working and
Hi,
I tried hard installing Debian/sparc64, it was not easy at all and
haven't concluded.
The T2000 I started from had Linux already installed, with an older 4.x
series kernel, I'd guess not updated since 3 years. It was working and
was configured with SILO. I tried updating but the boot
On 28/02/2021 19:27, Frank Scheiner wrote:
Hi Mark,
On 24.02.21 14:01, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 24/02/2021 12:29, Frank Scheiner wrote:
On 24.02.21 12:14, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Next time you have the U450 fired up, I'd be interested to find out if
it is possible to boot directly from
Hi Debian-sparc,
Happy Chinese New Year！
We’ve back to work, and ready to serve you all the time, thanks.
Have a nice day!
Thanks Regards,
Cherry Hu |Sales Manager
SHENZHEN PLUXLED LIGHTING CO., LIMITED.
4F,Building 4, Huafeng
Hi Mark,
On 24.02.21 14:01, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 24/02/2021 12:29, Frank Scheiner wrote:
On 24.02.21 12:14, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Next time you have the U450 fired up, I'd be interested to find out if
it is possible to boot directly from the latest debian ports CDROM for
comparison.
Hi Mark,
On 24.02.21 14:01, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 24/02/2021 12:29, Frank Scheiner wrote:
On 24.02.21 12:14, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Thanks for the information! Do you have a display on your U450 at all?
No, access was/is via serial console.
The U450 we were trying to rescue was
On 24/02/2021 12:29, Frank Scheiner wrote:
Hi Mark,
On 24.02.21 12:14, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
[...]
I then asked them to work backwards through a collection of historical
debian-ports ISOs that I own until we found one that would boot. The
results were as follows:
Hi Frank!
On 2/24/21 1:43 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>> There is a stability issue on newer kernels on older hardware that is
>> currently
>> being debugged though [1].
>
> Didn't know of that thread. I wonder if this could be the reason for the
> crashes on my v480 and v490, though they
Hi Adrian,
On 24.02.21 13:04, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Hi Mark!
On 2/24/21 12:14 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Do people still run newer kernels on older hardware? If there is interest,
I may be able to get some more diagnostic information. In particular I'd be
curious to know if Oracle
Hi Mark,
On 24.02.21 12:14, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
[...]
I then asked them to work backwards through a collection of historical
debian-ports ISOs that I own until we found one that would boot. The
results were as follows:
debian-10.0.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (kernel 5.9.0-1-sparc64, grub) -
Hi Mark!
On 2/24/21 12:14 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> Do people still run newer kernels on older hardware? If there is interest,
> I may be able to get some more diagnostic information. In particular I'd be
> curious to know if Oracle do any routine testing of newer kernels on machines
> such
601 - 700 of 41554 matches
Mail list logo
