Messages in this thread | | | From | F Harvell <> | Subject | Re: Linux-2.1.98.. | Date | Fri, 24 Apr 1998 17:05:48 -0300 |
| |
On Fri, 24 Apr 1998 12:20:11 PDT, Bill Broadhurst wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 at 10:34:20AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Can you check what happens with: > > (a) no floppy driver compiled in at all > > Boots. Runs. But hung hard during the "make dep" portion of the build. > Not far into it either. Had to stop and clean drives.
I can verify that it booted this way on my system as well. I immediately rebooted to check the second (b) case.
> > (b) the floppy driver compiled in, but with the calls to > > "fd_enable_irq()" and "fd_disable_irq()" commented out. > > Boots and runs too. I'll let this one run 'till it dies.
This version also ran on my system.
Some further info: compiling the floppy driver as a module lets the system boot, but, if there is a floppy access, the system will hard lock. Commenting out the "fd_enable_irq()" and "fd_disable_irq()" and compiling as a module boots and allows floppy access.
> > The irq enable/disable code has some problems with the IO-APIC, and I'd > > like to pinpoint whether this is the reason for your problems or not. We > > should fix the IO-APIC problems too, of course, but that will take some > > more doing. > > I'm all for that. What can I do to help?
I'm also ready and willing to help support this. I really want to get these problems solved. I'm hoping that, when we solve this, the problems with processes getting stuck in the "D" state will disappear. Lately, I have begun to see update (bdflush) get stuck. This effectively crashes my system.
> > One more thing. I lost some of my earlier kernels due to a disk crash > last night. In replacing them from source I discovered that .81, .82, > .83, and .84 all die with "Aiee, interrupt in swapper task..." > There was a minor work-around for this back then. Do you remember what > it was. I'd like to go back through those kernels and verify that the > load problem I saw started at .85. One of my production machines has > locked twice in the middle of a model resolution. It was running .83 > at the time. I've dropped it back to the 2.0 series kernel since it's > extra HW isn't in use right now. At any rate, I'd just like to run > what ever the most stable of that pre-85 series. Anyone remember which > was most solid of the .8x kernels?
I was using 2.1.84 as my "stable" kernel. The IO-APIC stuff turned on in 2.1.85-94 really triggered the "D" state problems. The changes in 2.1.95, though, allowed me to begin using that one as my "stable" kernel. (Of course, as I type this, I am running on the 2.1.98 kernel. :)
-- Mr. F Harvell Phone:407 696-4340 FTS International, Systems Division Phone:407 399-0342 (cell) 3498 Buffam Place Fax:407 696-4244 Casselberry, FL 32707 mailto:fharvell@fts.net
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |