ahh, interesting ... my U60 is a (2x450), so according to what you've
just said, I'm extremely lucky to have it running as stable as I do
(not to mention the raid mirroring working like a charm). Until I just
have an abundance of time, I'll likely just continue using my 2.6.6
kernel. I just set a crontab to run a simple init 6 once a week, so I
at least shouldn't get the lockups anymore.

jbw

On 9/17/05, Ferris McCormick <fmccor@g.o> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Sat, 17 Sep 2005, Jason Williams wrote:
> 
> > hmm, interesting ... I admit, it's been a few months since I've tried,
> > but when I did, I eventually gave up and got hold of the old 2.6.6
> > tree. Like Ciaran said, it's likely just the difference in hardware
> > because the machine I have here that runs gentoo is a U60 while the
> > one at work is a U5. That said though, I did run a very stable 2.6
> > kernel on this very same U60 a few months back in debian. What this
> > line of thought leads to though is that debian gives you the most
> > universally working 2.6 kernel version levels by default, so I must
> > now ask: who out there runs a stable 2.6 kernel on a U60, so I'll know
> > what version works best on it?
> >
> 
> The kernel-2.6.xx series seems stable on a U5.  There are kernel issues
> with all 2.6.xx kernels on U60, depending on just what U60 you have.  For
> example, most kernel-2.6.xx versions are reasonably (but not completely)
> stable for me on U60(2x300) system, but no kernel 2.6.xx I've tried has
> been usable on my U60(2x450) under any sort of load.  Only difference
> between the systems is the CPU set. (Well, memory might be different, but
> disks are the same with similar partitioning scheme.)
> 
> This problem is under investigation by the kernel developers (davem and
> crew), but nothing has fixed this problem yet.  And for your information,
> a while ago a debian user reported seeing this problem on a debian U2
> system, so it does not seem to be Gentoo-specific.  We see it for Gentoo
> on U2, U60, and Netra systems, and it is easily verified.
> 
> Current usable (but still somewhat unstable) system for me on U60(2x300)
> is 2.6.13-rc4-vanilla out of sys-kernel/vanilla-sources, although that
> kernel is out of date.  I think people are having some success with
> 2.6.14, but so far as I know the periodic lock-up problem is still
> present.  If you join #gentoo-sparc IRC freenode channel, you can ask
> around and get more current information.  (Also, you might get better
> information on the 2-Creator problem you are seeing.  That's supposed to
> work, but I don't have a system I can test it on.)
> 
> 
> 
> > All that said, it is good to know now that there's more cooperation
> > between the sparc porting developers than I'd previously thought.
> > Thanks guys.
> >
> > jbw
> >
> > On 9/17/05, Andrew Ruef <munin@...> wrote:
> >> What problems do you face running 2.6 using Gentoo sources? For the longest
> >> time I was using 2.6.11-hardened-r15 before switching to a custom version of
> >> 2.6.13, I had no issues...
> >>
> >> Andrew Ruef
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jason Williams [mailto:jason.b.williams@...]
> >> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 8:14 PM
> >> To: Gentoo Sparc
> >> Subject: [gentoo-sparc] 2.6 kernel development
> >>
> >> It seems to me that there's a problem in cooperation between
> >> distributions that port the linux kernel to sparc. The reason I say
> >> this is, I run a very stable web/mail server on a sparc at work that
> >> is running debian with a 2.6.8 kernel. However, in gentoo I've not
> >> been able to get a 2.6 kernel that's currently in portage running,
> >> much less stable.
> >>
> >> The dilemma here is that I much prefer gentoo sparc in every other
> >> respect than the kernel (well maybe speed of getting a running system,
> >> but that I understand and am willing to deal with - that's gentoo in
> >> general;-). Why is it that their 2.6 kernel is so great while gentoo's
> >> is so unstable?
> >>
> >> Anyways, that said, I have a question. Since the debian sparc 2.6
> >> kernel seems so stable is there any reason why I can't just take their
> >> source tree and compile it in gentoo? It seems to me that this would
> >> be the best solution to my dilemma. It'd essentially just be a way of
> >> taking advantage of their one advantage over gentoo sparc.
> >>
> >> jbw
> >>
> Regards,
> Ferris
> - --
> Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o>
> Developer, Gentoo Linux (sparc, devrel)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFDLNtzQa6M3+I///cRAqeZAJ9bcAWA5p6kKwSBBH0py20PrdqsAQCfVa4v
> T0XNoVnEw1yLJoiJI8g0gLs=
> =tkFL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> --
> gentoo-sparc@g.o mailing list
> 
>

-- 
gentoo-sparc@g.o mailing list