Re: [FYI] linux 2.6 still not working with PReP (ppc32)

From: Sebastian Heutling <sheutlin@gmx.de>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [FYI] linux 2.6 still not working with PReP (ppc32)
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 01:41:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1102207299.6778.16.camel@weizen.left.earth> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41B23DF2.4010303@g-house.de>

You got the powerstack booting from scsi (reading and interpreting the
bug report). I had problems booting 2.6 kernels as well (never tested
any 2.5 kernels). It turned out that the pci slot numbering has changed
sometime and this wasn't reflected in arch/ppc/platforms/prep_pci.c.
After having set up the slot0...slot8 using the values of
slot10...slot18 (except for slot1 which got value 4 so IDE is usable out
of the box), the machine booted a 2.6 kernel (2.6.8).

Sebastian

On Sat, 2004-12-04 at 23:45 +0100, Christian Kujau wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> hi,
> 
> upon receiving some calls about the status on this issue, i decided to
> update http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1494 , which i reported a
> while back. yes, this is "just a PReP" and i am fully aware that PReP is
> not used in recent setups any more and i too will not my PReP for HPC
> applications. but perhaps someone has an idea about what's goin on here.
> 
> the bugreport should give you th full details, in short: linux 2.5.30 is
> the last working kernel for ppc32/PReP with networking enabled.
> (net)booting a recent 2.6 kernels spit out lots of these:
> 
> (with tulip NIC)
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 irq 9: nobody cared!
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 Call trace:
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c002e99c] __report_bad_irq+0x34/0xac
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c002eb00] note_interrupt+0xd0/0x104
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c002e480] __do_IRQ+0x174/0x184
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c00053e0] do_IRQ+0x38/0x98
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c00044cc] ret_from_except+0x0/0x14
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c002e748] setup_irq+0xd8/0x138
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c002e938] request_irq+0x90/0xc0
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0103504] tulip_open+0x30/0xb6c
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0117274] dev_open+0xb0/0xd8
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0118a7c] dev_change_flags+0x6c/0x144
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0123db4] netpoll_setup+0x1c4/0x364
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0106fe0] init_netconsole+0x3c/0x94
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0003a64] init+0xb8/0x230
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [c0006524] kernel_thread+0x44/0x60
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 handlers:
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 [<c010101c>] (tulip_interrupt+0x0/0xd3c)
> Dec  3 23:56:39 192.168.10.9 Disabling IRQ #9
> 
> (with 3c59x NIC)
> 192.168.10.9 NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
> 192.168.10.9 eth0: transmit timed out, tx_status 00 status e800.
> 192.168.10.9 diagnostics: net 0cc0 media 8802 dma 002000b3 fifo 0000
> 192.168.10.9 eth0: Interrupt posted but not delivered -- IRQ blocked by
> another device?
> 192.168.10.9 Flags; bus-master 1, dirty 67(3) current 68(4)
> 192.168.10.9 Transmit list 806fe480 vs. c06fe3e0.
> 192.168.10.9 0: @c06fe200  length 80000054 status 00000054
> 192.168.10.9 1: @c06fe2a0  length 8000005e status 0000005e
> 192.168.10.9 2: @c06fe340  length 80000064 status 00000064
> 192.168.10.9 3: @c06fe3e0  length 80000075 status 00000075
> 192.168.10.9 4: @c06fe480  length 8000005b status 0000005b
> 192.168.10.9 5: @c06fe520  length 80000051 status 00000051
> 192.168.10.9 6: @c06fe5c0  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 7: @c06fe660  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 8: @c06fe700  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 9: @c06fe7a0  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 10: @c06fe840  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 11: @c06fe8e0  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 12: @c06fe980  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 13: @c06fea20  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 14: @c06feac0  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 13: @c06fea20  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 14: @c06feac0  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 192.168.10.9 15: @c06feb60  length 8000005a status 0000005a
> 
> is it possible to use another irq for the network-device driver?
> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt gives some options about other
> drivers, but i can't tell how to specify "use this irq" for tulip/3c59x.
> 
> especially the "IRQ blocked by another device?" message makes me think,
> that manual irq config could help here. but maybe i'm wrong.
> 
> the results posted on http://nerdbynature.de/bits/sheep/2.6.10-rc2/ are
> from current 2.6 kernels: the offical tree and the linuxppc25 tree was used.
> 
> thank you for comments,
> Christian.
> - --
> BOFH excuse #441:
> 
> Hash table has woodworm
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFBsj3y+A7rjkF8z0wRAldLAJ9QFTfr8UeOtXbnSCGWBVJr7IAAKgCgiHRV
> iB/ozetyCDIMSfAa+1MRxVc=
> =b5BK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev