[gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[maxim wexler]

Hi group,

The new kernel panics at a typical place:
<...>
VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown-block (8,7)

then just below this appears:

<6> Time: tsc clocksource has been installed.
<crash>

The root fs is reiserfs and *is* part of the kernel.

Yes, CONFIG_UNIX=y

I thought it might be the SATA drive. The previous
kernel, 2.6.16, sets up SATA slightly different.

>From the new, 2.6.20 .config:

CONFIG_SCSI=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y
CONFIG_ATA=y
CONFIG_SATA_SIL=y 

>From the previous, 2.6.16 two options no longer
present in the 2.6.20 kernel

CONFIG_SCSI_SATA=y
CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SIL=y

So, is this a SATA/SCSI problem or something else?

-Maxim

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Montag, 30. April 2007, maxim wexler wrote:
> Hi group,
>
> The new kernel panics at a typical place:
> <...>
> VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown-block (8,7)
>
> then just below this appears:
>
> <6> Time: tsc clocksource has been installed.
> <crash>
>
> The root fs is reiserfs and *is* part of the kernel.
>
> Yes, CONFIG_UNIX=y

that is not the reiserfs option.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --]

Am Montag, 30. April 2007 schrieb ext maxim wexler:
> Hi group,
>
> The new kernel panics at a typical place:
> <...>
> VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown-block (8,7)
>
> From the new, 2.6.20 .config:
>
> CONFIG_SCSI=y
> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y
> CONFIG_ATA=y
> CONFIG_SATA_SIL=y
>
> From the previous, 2.6.16 two options no longer
> present in the 2.6.20 kernel
>
> CONFIG_SCSI_SATA=y
> CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SIL=y

Well, without

CONFIG_SCSI=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y

you won't be able to boot from a SATA disk. So re-enabling them should solve 
the problem.

HTH...

	Dirk
-- 
Dirk Heinrichs          | Tel:  +49 (0)162 234 3408
Configuration Manager   | Fax:  +49 (0)211 47068 111
Capgemini Deutschland   | Mail: dirk.heinrichs@capgemini.com
Wanheimerstraße 68      | Web:  http://www.capgemini.com
D-40468 Düsseldorf      | ICQ#: 110037733
GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[maxim wexler]

--- Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs.ext@nsn.com> wrote:

> Am Montag, 30. April 2007 schrieb ext maxim wexler:
> > Hi group,
> >
> > The new kernel panics at a typical place:
> > <...>
> > VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown-block
> (8,7)
> >
> > From the new, 2.6.20 .config:
> >
> > CONFIG_SCSI=y
> > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y
> > CONFIG_ATA=y
> > CONFIG_SATA_SIL=y
> Well, without
> 
> CONFIG_SCSI=y
> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y
> 
> you won't be able to boot from a SATA disk. So
> re-enabling them should solve 
> the problem.

Huh? They *are* enabled.

-mw

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[maxim wexler]

> > Yes, CONFIG_UNIX=y
> 
> that is not the reiserfs option.

I'm aware of that. But another PC with the 2.6.19
kernel and an IDE drive panicked until I set
CONFIG_UNIX=y. Didn't help in this case.

-mw

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Montag, 30. April 2007, maxim wexler wrote:
> > > Yes, CONFIG_UNIX=y
> >
> > that is not the reiserfs option.
>
> I'm aware of that. But another PC with the 2.6.19
> kernel and an IDE drive panicked until I set
> CONFIG_UNIX=y. Didn't help in this case.

well, you should have set sockets, because it is THAT way to communicate with 
the kernel.  So CONFIG_UNIX has to be y.

about your problem - do make menuconfig and recheck your driver and fs 
settings.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

Am Montag, den 30.04.2007, 17:24 +0200 schrieb Hemmann, Volker Armin:
> On Montag, 30. April 2007, maxim wexler wrote:
> > > > Yes, CONFIG_UNIX=y
> > >
> > > that is not the reiserfs option.
> >
> > I'm aware of that. But another PC with the 2.6.19
> > kernel and an IDE drive panicked until I set
> > CONFIG_UNIX=y. Didn't help in this case.
> 
> well, you should have set sockets, because it is THAT way to communicate with 
> the kernel.  So CONFIG_UNIX has to be y.

Nope, Unix sockets are usually not the commonly chosen way for
kernel<->userland communication. They're used for machine-local (w/
exception of clusters) inter-process communication. But I think that
init would struggle w/o CONFIG_UNIX and, of course, udev. So Maxim might
have hit problems there. But that's just nitpicking here ;-)

@OP: You can scroll kernel boot output using Shift-PgUp/-PgDown. From
what you can see there you should be able to tell whether your HD is
recognized or not and what's its device name (which you must hand to
the kernel via the "root=..." kernel command line parameter).

-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 2.6.20-r6 panics with strange message

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Montag, 30. April 2007, Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:

>
> Nope, Unix sockets are usually not the commonly chosen way for
> kernel<->userland communication. They're used for machine-local (w/
> exception of clusters) inter-process communication. But I think that
> init would struggle w/o CONFIG_UNIX and, of course, udev. So Maxim might
> have hit problems there. But that's just nitpicking here ;-)

you forgot X.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list