Re: (Sparc64) 2.6.20 seems to ignore initramfs

[Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@wpkg.org>]

Andrew Walrond schrieb:
> On Friday 23 February 2007 13:32, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>> Andrew Walrond schrieb:
>>> On a Sun T1000 I am trying to boot 2.6.20 using initramfs. (I use the
>>> same procedure successfully on x86_64 and itanium2 servers).
>>>
>>> The relevent silo section looks like this:
>>>
>>> image=/boot/2.6.20.image
>>>         label=2.6.20
>>>         initrd=/boot/2.6.20.initramfs
>>>         partition=2
>>>         read-only
>>>
>>> The kernel loads and boots and I see
>> (...)
>>
>>> So it knows about the initramfs, but then tries to mount a root
>>> filesystem instead...
>>>
>>> I haven't tried this (initramfs)  with earlier kernels, so I don't know
>>> whether this is a regression. Any clues about how to solve this would be
>>> greatly appreciated.
>> Does it make a difference if you embed initramfs directly in the kernel?
>>
>> CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE="/path/to/your/initramfs/directory"
> 
> Hi Tomasz. I can't tell; The combined kernel+initramfs is bigger than the 8Mb 
> silo allocates for the kernel, and it does this:
> 
> 	boot: chunky
> 	Allocated 8 Megs of memory at 0x40000000 for kernel
> 	/
> 	Fatal error: Image too large to fit in destination
> 	
> 	Fatal error: Image too large to fit in destination
> 	
> 	Error loading /boot/chunky
> 	
> 	Image not found.... try again
> 
> 
> I don't see any silo config options to increase this value in the docs.
> 
> Good idea though :)

Try to decrease the initramfs size just to know if it boots correctly.

I.e., put just a sh/bash/ash/dash binary there (probably /dev/console 
node, too), executed in init.

Then, try to start the kernel with initramfs embedded in the kernel, 
then as initrd etc. - this will show if the fault is on your side, or 
kernel's.


-- 
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org