Re: make oldfonfig broken.

Randy Dunlap
2014-02-11T18:22:29Z

On 02/10/2014 04:13 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 10 February 2014, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 02/10/2014 12:21 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>> On Monday 10 February 2014, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>> On 02/09/2014 08:32 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>> AUTOSELECT driver feature Better! ugh.
>>>
>>> Spit. I presume geneology discussions are off topic. :)
>>>
>>>> Good luck. Let me know if you need more guidance.
>>>
>>> Hat in hand, I figured I had better get the first one that fails,
>>> 3.2.40, to work before I carried that fwd to a more current kernel,
>>> but 5 or 6 builds & boot failure later I am stumped.
>>>
>>> The boot gets to top_init, reports the / drive is unavailable and it
>>> cannot load /lib/modules/3.2.40/modules.dep, which does exist.
>>>
>>> Stops, times out in about a minute and falls thru to the busybox shell,
>>> and of course my keyboard and mouse are wireless to usb, so neither
>>> work, reset button tap time.
>>>
>>> The only reason I can deduce is that because the drive isn't mounted,
>>> something is still missing, either in the vmlinuz file or in the initrd
>>> file.
>>>
>>> This most working 3.12.9 bootup shows:
>>>
>>> gene@coyote:~/src/linux-3.2.40$ lsmod |grep sata
>>> sata_nv 16890 12
>>> libata 146855 2 pata_amd,sata_nv
>>>
>>> And I'm pretty sure all that is in the initrd.
>>>
>>> Except according to grep, none of that is in
>>> /lib/modules/3.2.40/modules.dep
>>>
>>> And I cannot find anyplace in a make xconfig that mentions libata.
>>> So obviously my .config is still fubared. It does grep in the other
>>> modules.dep files for several other versions.
>>>
>>> In fact, no .config I have mentions it. At my age the hair is thinning
>>> quickly enough.
>>>
>>> So, Next please? libata is missing, and so is sata_nv in spite of that
>>
>>> being enabled:
>> It's missing as a loadable module, but that's OK since it's builtin.
>>
>>> gene@coyote:~/src/linux-3.2.40$ grep SATA_NV .config
>>> CONFIG_SATA_NV=y
>>>
>>> But I see thats builtin, but it didn't help.
>>
>> Your .config has (I believe)
>> CONFIG_ATA=y
>> and that is what builds libata.
>>
>> Any other clues?
>
> Not that I see in the build trace. grepping:
> gene@coyote:~/src/linux-3.2.40$ grep CONFIG_ATA .config
> CONFIG_ATALK=m
> # CONFIG_ATA_OVER_ETH is not set
> CONFIG_ATA=y
> # CONFIG_ATA_NONSTANDARD is not set
> CONFIG_ATA_VERBOSE_ERROR=y
> CONFIG_ATA_ACPI=y
> CONFIG_ATA_SFF=y
> CONFIG_ATA_BMDMA=y
> # CONFIG_ATA_PIIX is not set
> CONFIG_ATA_GENERIC=m
>
> And it seems to be building libata:
> gene@coyote:~/src/linux-3.2.40/drivers/ata$ ls -l|grep libata|grep .o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10236 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-acpi.o
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 gene gene 175870 2013-03-05 22:24 libata-core.c
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 89616 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-core.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 35904 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-eh.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 222732 2014-02-10 18:19 libata.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12072 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-pmp.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 37156 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-scsi.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 40996 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-sff.o
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 gene gene 19559 2013-03-05 22:24 libata-transport.c
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 gene gene 536 2013-03-05 22:24 libata-transport.h
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 11772 2014-02-10 18:19 libata-transport.o
>
> But libata.ko is not making it into the initrd, nor the modules.dep for
> 3.2.40.
>
> I been playing 20 monkeys changing one ata related thing at a time & doing
> a sudo time -p ./makeit to check, not much use rebooting to check until I
> see it.
>
> I'll go gedit .config & change CONFIG_ATA to = m & try one more time.
>
> Got it, test reboot time. Made it 2 lines farther, "switching to clock
> source TSC" then fell through to the busybox prompt with all inputs dead.
>
> Sigh.
>
> .config attached if you've got time.

You have ext[234] filesystems builtin. I suppose the rootfs is one of those?

Your .config file also has the ATA drivers as =m (loadable modules), but
I guess that you also tested with those drivers =y (builtin).

I don't see what the problem is.
You may need to try taking a photo of the failed boot and sending it to
the mailing list (and me) again, even though that has not worked for you
some time in the past.

--
~Randy