Gentoo Archives: gentoo-sparc

From: Jason Williams <jason.b.williams@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-sparc@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-sparc] 2.6 kernel development
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 06:37:20
Message-Id: 59cc4da0050917233647a8d7e0@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-sparc] 2.6 kernel development by Ferris McCormick
1 ahh, interesting ... my U60 is a (2x450), so according to what you've
2 just said, I'm extremely lucky to have it running as stable as I do
3 (not to mention the raid mirroring working like a charm). Until I just
4 have an abundance of time, I'll likely just continue using my 2.6.6
5 kernel. I just set a crontab to run a simple init 6 once a week, so I
6 at least shouldn't get the lockups anymore.
7
8 jbw
9
10 On 9/17/05, Ferris McCormick <fmccor@g.o> wrote:
11 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
12 > Hash: SHA1
13 >
14 > On Sat, 17 Sep 2005, Jason Williams wrote:
15 >
16 > > hmm, interesting ... I admit, it's been a few months since I've tried,
17 > > but when I did, I eventually gave up and got hold of the old 2.6.6
18 > > tree. Like Ciaran said, it's likely just the difference in hardware
19 > > because the machine I have here that runs gentoo is a U60 while the
20 > > one at work is a U5. That said though, I did run a very stable 2.6
21 > > kernel on this very same U60 a few months back in debian. What this
22 > > line of thought leads to though is that debian gives you the most
23 > > universally working 2.6 kernel version levels by default, so I must
24 > > now ask: who out there runs a stable 2.6 kernel on a U60, so I'll know
25 > > what version works best on it?
26 > >
27 >
28 > The kernel-2.6.xx series seems stable on a U5. There are kernel issues
29 > with all 2.6.xx kernels on U60, depending on just what U60 you have. For
30 > example, most kernel-2.6.xx versions are reasonably (but not completely)
31 > stable for me on U60(2x300) system, but no kernel 2.6.xx I've tried has
32 > been usable on my U60(2x450) under any sort of load. Only difference
33 > between the systems is the CPU set. (Well, memory might be different, but
34 > disks are the same with similar partitioning scheme.)
35 >
36 > This problem is under investigation by the kernel developers (davem and
37 > crew), but nothing has fixed this problem yet. And for your information,
38 > a while ago a debian user reported seeing this problem on a debian U2
39 > system, so it does not seem to be Gentoo-specific. We see it for Gentoo
40 > on U2, U60, and Netra systems, and it is easily verified.
41 >
42 > Current usable (but still somewhat unstable) system for me on U60(2x300)
43 > is 2.6.13-rc4-vanilla out of sys-kernel/vanilla-sources, although that
44 > kernel is out of date. I think people are having some success with
45 > 2.6.14, but so far as I know the periodic lock-up problem is still
46 > present. If you join #gentoo-sparc IRC freenode channel, you can ask
47 > around and get more current information. (Also, you might get better
48 > information on the 2-Creator problem you are seeing. That's supposed to
49 > work, but I don't have a system I can test it on.)
50 >
51 >
52 >
53 > > All that said, it is good to know now that there's more cooperation
54 > > between the sparc porting developers than I'd previously thought.
55 > > Thanks guys.
56 > >
57 > > jbw
58 > >
59 > > On 9/17/05, Andrew Ruef <munin@×××××××××.net> wrote:
60 > >> What problems do you face running 2.6 using Gentoo sources? For the longest
61 > >> time I was using 2.6.11-hardened-r15 before switching to a custom version of
62 > >> 2.6.13, I had no issues...
63 > >>
64 > >> Andrew Ruef
65 > >>
66 > >> -----Original Message-----
67 > >> From: Jason Williams [mailto:jason.b.williams@×××××.com]
68 > >> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 8:14 PM
69 > >> To: Gentoo Sparc
70 > >> Subject: [gentoo-sparc] 2.6 kernel development
71 > >>
72 > >> It seems to me that there's a problem in cooperation between
73 > >> distributions that port the linux kernel to sparc. The reason I say
74 > >> this is, I run a very stable web/mail server on a sparc at work that
75 > >> is running debian with a 2.6.8 kernel. However, in gentoo I've not
76 > >> been able to get a 2.6 kernel that's currently in portage running,
77 > >> much less stable.
78 > >>
79 > >> The dilemma here is that I much prefer gentoo sparc in every other
80 > >> respect than the kernel (well maybe speed of getting a running system,
81 > >> but that I understand and am willing to deal with - that's gentoo in
82 > >> general;-). Why is it that their 2.6 kernel is so great while gentoo's
83 > >> is so unstable?
84 > >>
85 > >> Anyways, that said, I have a question. Since the debian sparc 2.6
86 > >> kernel seems so stable is there any reason why I can't just take their
87 > >> source tree and compile it in gentoo? It seems to me that this would
88 > >> be the best solution to my dilemma. It'd essentially just be a way of
89 > >> taking advantage of their one advantage over gentoo sparc.
90 > >>
91 > >> jbw
92 > >>
93 > Regards,
94 > Ferris
95 > - --
96 > Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o>
97 > Developer, Gentoo Linux (sparc, devrel)
98 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
99 > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
100 >
101 > iD8DBQFDLNtzQa6M3+I///cRAqeZAJ9bcAWA5p6kKwSBBH0py20PrdqsAQCfVa4v
102 > T0XNoVnEw1yLJoiJI8g0gLs=
103 > =tkFL
104 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
105 > --
106 > gentoo-sparc@g.o mailing list
107 >
108 >
109
110 --
111 gentoo-sparc@g.o mailing list