FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Kernel Team

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-28-2010, 06:47 PM
Lucio Crusca
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

Hello *,

I don't know if this is the correct place to ask, however I'm trying to
compile 2.6.34 vanilla on my Ubuntu 10.04 in order to spot a possible
regression bug in current Lucid Lynx kernel. However I can't get 2.6.34 to
boot. Can you help me have 2.6.34 boot on my system please?

If this is the correct place and you feel like helping me, you can take a
look at the bug report [1] for details about the kernel config I'm using and
my hardware, so that I don't repeat all that stuff here.

Thanks a lot,
Lucio.

[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/585258


--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 07:38 PM
Stefan Bader
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

On 05/28/2010 08:47 PM, Lucio Crusca wrote:
> Hello *,
>
> I don't know if this is the correct place to ask, however I'm trying to
> compile 2.6.34 vanilla on my Ubuntu 10.04 in order to spot a possible
> regression bug in current Lucid Lynx kernel. However I can't get 2.6.34 to
> boot. Can you help me have 2.6.34 boot on my system please?
>
> If this is the correct place and you feel like helping me, you can take a
> look at the bug report [1] for details about the kernel config I'm using and
> my hardware, so that I don't repeat all that stuff here.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Lucio.
>
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/585258
>
>
Hi Lucio,

if you wanted to try a 2.6.34 kernel with just the most similar config to the
standard Ubuntu config, it might be simpler to just use one of the pre-compiled
kernels from http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/

As for the actual problem. This sounds very very much like the pain caused by
bios vendors blindly following guidelines which ms did not necessarily give.

Try to boot with acpi_osi="!Windows 2009" as a kernel argument and see whether
this does not revive the fn+f8 combination.

-Stefan

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 07:43 PM
"Robert P. J. Day"
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

On Fri, 28 May 2010, Stefan Bader wrote:

> On 05/28/2010 08:47 PM, Lucio Crusca wrote:
> > Hello *,
> >
> > I don't know if this is the correct place to ask, however I'm
> > trying to compile 2.6.34 vanilla on my Ubuntu 10.04 in order to
> > spot a possible regression bug in current Lucid Lynx kernel.
> > However I can't get 2.6.34 to boot. Can you help me have 2.6.34
> > boot on my system please?
> >
> > If this is the correct place and you feel like helping me, you can
> > take a look at the bug report [1] for details about the kernel
> > config I'm using and my hardware, so that I don't repeat all that
> > stuff here.
> >
> > Thanks a lot,
> > Lucio.
> >
> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/585258
> >
> >
> Hi Lucio,
>
> if you wanted to try a 2.6.34 kernel with just the most similar
> config to the standard Ubuntu config, it might be simpler to just
> use one of the pre-compiled kernels from
> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/
... snip ...

if i might interrupt, is the OP saying he can't even *boot* 2.6.34?
i'm running 2.6.34-rc7, built from the git pull of that version. i
should probably take a few minutes and build a newer one now that
2.6.34 is out. even if you still have the aforementioned bug, that
shouldn't be any reason to fail to simply boot.

or am i misunderstanding something?

rday

--

================================================== ======================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.

Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
================================================== ======================

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 07:55 PM
Lucio Crusca
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

Stefan Bader wrote:
> Hi Lucio,
>
> if you wanted to try a 2.6.34 kernel with just the most similar config to
> the standard Ubuntu config, it might be simpler to just use one of the
> pre-compiled kernels from http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/

Thanks Stefan, I wasn't even aware of that url...

> Try to boot with acpi_osi="!Windows 2009" as a kernel argument and see
> whether this does not revive the fn+f8 combination.

I'll try as soon as I have 2.6.34 installed, so that I can run both tests.

Out of curiosity: do the mainline kernels include significant patches to the
corresponding vanilla ones? In other words, are Ubuntu patches cosmetic ones
(or performance centric) or do they add some hardware compatibility
otherwise not obtainable with unpoatched vanilla sources? Yet another
rewording of the question: do I have any chance to compile a vanilla kernel
and see it boot without applying Ubuntu patches?



--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 08:02 PM
Lucio Crusca
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> if i might interrupt, is the OP saying he can't even *boot* 2.6.34?

It depends on the exact meaning of "boot", maybe I misused the word. My
2.6.34 actually boots it hangs when it's time to mount the root fs. I'm
pretty sure the VGA output bug has nothing to do with that, but I needed a
working more recent kernel to test it and I hung at having it boot my
system.

Lucio.



--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 08:17 PM
Chase Douglas
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 21:55 +0200, Lucio Crusca wrote:
> Stefan Bader wrote:
> Out of curiosity: do the mainline kernels include significant patches to the
> corresponding vanilla ones? In other words, are Ubuntu patches cosmetic ones
> (or performance centric) or do they add some hardware compatibility
> otherwise not obtainable with unpoatched vanilla sources? Yet another
> rewording of the question: do I have any chance to compile a vanilla kernel
> and see it boot without applying Ubuntu patches?

The mainline kernels we build have the exact same source as the vanilla
kernels from upstream. We take our Ubuntu kernel config and port it
over, but that's it.

If you want to try an Ubuntu kernel, you can install the Maverick
development kernels. They will be tracking upstream until 2.6.35 is
released. At that point, they will track the 2.6.35 stable tree.


--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 08:20 PM
Stefan Bader
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

On 05/28/2010 09:55 PM, Lucio Crusca wrote:
> Stefan Bader wrote:
>> Hi Lucio,
>>
>> if you wanted to try a 2.6.34 kernel with just the most similar config to
>> the standard Ubuntu config, it might be simpler to just use one of the
>> pre-compiled kernels from http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/
>
> Thanks Stefan, I wasn't even aware of that url...
>
>> Try to boot with acpi_osi="!Windows 2009" as a kernel argument and see
>> whether this does not revive the fn+f8 combination.
>
> I'll try as soon as I have 2.6.34 installed, so that I can run both tests.
>
> Out of curiosity: do the mainline kernels include significant patches to the
> corresponding vanilla ones? In other words, are Ubuntu patches cosmetic ones
> (or performance centric) or do they add some hardware compatibility
> otherwise not obtainable with unpoatched vanilla sources? Yet another
> rewording of the question: do I have any chance to compile a vanilla kernel
> and see it boot without applying Ubuntu patches?
>
The mainline kernels are exactly the same as the vanilla kernels with the same
version. The Ubuntu kernels have some additional patches and drivers but those
should not prevent booting. I suspect your problem might have been a missing or
incorrectly created ramdisk. Thus failing to find the rootfs. And as your goal
is only to have a vanilla 2.6.34 kernel to check, why not safe the effort of
finding out what went wrong and burning more compile time.

And the fn+f8 misbehaviour has been seen in other cases. It is usually caused by
Linux claiming to be compatible with any known version of Windows on the ACPI
layer. And recent BIOSes changing behaviour it seems there is a Windows7 running.

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-28-2010, 09:06 PM
Lucio Crusca
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

Stefan Bader wrote:

> Try to boot with acpi_osi="!Windows 2009" as a kernel argument and see
> whether this does not revive the fn+f8 combination.

Unfortunately it does not, neither with 2.6.32 lucid nor 2.6.34 mainline.

> And as your goal
> is only to have a vanilla 2.6.34 kernel to check, why not safe the effort
> of finding out what went wrong and burning more compile time.

of course I followed the suggestion. However I'm quite puzzled, I've been
able to configure and build a working Debian kernel since 2.4 times until
2.6.25 or so (I compiled a working 2.6.34 kernel just a few days ago but for
a different hardware)... now I wonder what can have changed so much that
pervents me to build a working-customly-configured kernel despite several
trials on my dell precision m4400... it's just a need of knowledge.



--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-29-2010, 08:55 AM
"Robert P. J. Day"
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

On Fri, 28 May 2010, Lucio Crusca wrote:

> Out of curiosity: do the mainline kernels include significant
> patches to the corresponding vanilla ones? In other words, are
> Ubuntu patches cosmetic ones (or performance centric) or do they add
> some hardware compatibility otherwise not obtainable with unpoatched
> vanilla sources? Yet another rewording of the question: do I have
> any chance to compile a vanilla kernel and see it boot without
> applying Ubuntu patches?

FWIW, i just compiled an up-to-date "git pull" of the mainline
kernel (so that would make it 2.6.34 plus whatever's been dumped on in
the subsequent merge window), based the configuration on the current
.config file, built, installed and rebooted. seems to be running fine
on my updated 10.04 system:

$ uname -a
Linux lynx 2.6.34 #1 SMP Fri May 28 17:41:42 EDT 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$

at a glance, my desktop is running, and wireless is working, which
are the two things that i would care about first. so, sure, running a
stock kernel seems eminently doable, at least as a starting point.

rday

--

================================================== ======================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.

Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
================================================== ======================

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 05-31-2010, 05:49 PM
Sune Mølgaard
 
Default compiling and booting 2.6.34

Lucio Crusca wrote:
> Stefan Bader wrote:
>
>> Try to boot with acpi_osi="!Windows 2009" as a kernel argument and see
>> whether this does not revive the fn+f8 combination.
>
> Unfortunately it does not, neither with 2.6.32 lucid nor 2.6.34 mainline.
>
>> And as your goal
>> is only to have a vanilla 2.6.34 kernel to check, why not safe the effort
>> of finding out what went wrong and burning more compile time.
>
> of course I followed the suggestion. However I'm quite puzzled, I've been
> able to configure and build a working Debian kernel since 2.4 times until
> 2.6.25 or so (I compiled a working 2.6.34 kernel just a few days ago but for
> a different hardware)... now I wonder what can have changed so much that
> pervents me to build a working-customly-configured kernel despite several
> trials on my dell precision m4400... it's just a need of knowledge.
>
>
>

For some odd reason, the step involving building the initramfs fails to
include a SATA module. For me, the quick and dirty fix was to compile
SATA_AHCI into the kernel, although it would be better to fix the
initramfs generation (heads up here, others)...

/Sune

--
The most overlooked advantage of owning a computer is that if they foul
up there's no law against whacking them around a bit.

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org