3:22 p.m.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fedora Test Update Notification
FEDORA-2006-967
2006-09-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Product : Fedora Core 5
Name : kernel
Version : 2.6.17
Release : 1.2187_FC5
Summary : The Linux kernel (the core of the Linux operating system)
Description :
The kernel package contains the Linux kernel (vmlinuz), the core of any
Linux operating system. The kernel handles the basic functions
of the operating system: memory allocation, process allocation, device
input and output, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Update Information:
An update to the latest upstream -stable release (2.6.17.13)
For further details see upstream changelogs at:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.17.13
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.17.12
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.17.11
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.17.10
---------------------------------------------------------------------
* Mon Sep 11 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> [2.6.17-1.2187_FC5]
- Add quirk for Samsung mp3 player. (#198128)
* Sun Sep 10 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Fix up mismerge in USB storage driver.
* Sat Sep 9 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.13
* Fri Sep 8 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.12
* Thu Aug 24 2006 Jarod Wilson <jwilson(a)redhat.com>
- update to 2.6.17.11
* Tue Aug 22 2006 Bill Nottingham <notting(a)redhat.com>
- update to 2.6.17.10
* Tue Aug 15 2006 Juan Quintela <quintela(a)redhat.com>
- linux-2.6-xen update
* linux-2.6.17-xen cset changeset: 29033:e6adb54afb96
* linux-2.6-xen cset 22813:80c2ccf5c330
- s/xen_version/xen_hv_cset/ as Fedora.
- update xen hv to cset 11061.
* Mon Aug 7 2006 Mike Christie <mchristi(a)redhat.com>
- Drop iscsi update patch.
* Mon Aug 7 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.8
* Fri Aug 4 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Fix split lock patch for 64bit.
* Fri Aug 4 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> [2.6.17-1.2171_FC5]
- 2.6.17.8rc1
* Wed Aug 2 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Readd patch to allow 460800 baud on 16C950 UARTs
* Sat Jul 29 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Silence noisy SCSI ioctl. (#200638)
* Fri Jul 28 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.7
* Thu Jul 27 2006 Rik van Riel <riel(a)redhat.com>
- reduce hypervisor stack use with -O2, this really fixes bug (#198932)
* Tue Jul 25 2006 Rik van Riel <riel(a)redhat.com>
- disable debug=y hypervisor build option because of stack overflow (#198932)
* Tue Jul 25 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Enable serio_raw (#199387)
* Sun Jul 16 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Support up to 4GB in the 586 kernel again.
* Sun Jul 16 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.6
* Fri Jul 14 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Reenable SMC NIC driver.
* Tue Jul 11 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.4
- Disable split pagetable lock
* Sat Jul 8 2006 Juan Quintela <quintela(a)redhat.com>
- enable CONFIG_CRASH on xen kernels.
- enable CONFIG_PCIDEV_BACKEND on xen kernels.
- make BLKDEV_FRONTEND a module on xen kernels.
- rebase with linux-2.6-xen-fedora 28918.
- Update to xen-unstable HV cset 10508.
- xen: credit scheduler is the default now.
* Wed Jul 5 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Get rid of stack backtrace on panic, which in most
cases actually caused a loss of info instead of a gain.
* Tue Jul 4 2006 Juan Quintela <quintela(a)redhat.com>
- new merge with xen upstream.
- xen kernel don't require xen userland.
- new xen kernel (same as rawhide one) with PAE support.
- removed xen0-PAE & xenU-PAE (see xen kernel).
* Fri Jun 30 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.3
- 2.6.17.2
- Fix the ALSA list_add bug.
* Mon Jun 26 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Enable fake PCI hotplug driver. (#190437)
- Enable gameport/joystick on i586 builds. (#196581)
* Sat Jun 24 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Enable profiling for 586 kernels.
* Fri Jun 23 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Make 'quiet' work again.
* Tue Jun 20 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> [2.6.17-1.2139_FC5]
- Rebuild with slab debug off.
* Tue Jun 20 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> [2.6.17-1.2138_FC5]
- 2.6.17.1
* Sun Jun 18 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17
- Only print info about SMP alternatives on SMP kernels.
* Tue Jun 6 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> [2.6.16-1.2133_FC5]
- Add a PPC64 kdump kernel.
* Mon Jun 5 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com> [2.6.16-1.2132_FC5]
- 2.6.16.20
* Thu Jun 1 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Reenable Xen builds.
* Tue May 30 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.16.19
* Sun May 28 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Fix unresolved symbol. (#193333)
* Sat May 27 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Improve list corruption debugging patch.
* Fri May 26 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- Remove xenU initrd's when kernel is removed.
* Fri May 26 2006 Juan Quintela <quintela(a)redhat.com>
- Remove ARCH=xen reminiscences on spec file
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This update can be downloaded from:
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/testing/5/
ae0df6f164bc41dc57679b4acc5bf12968b5394a SRPMS/kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.src.rpm
ae0df6f164bc41dc57679b4acc5bf12968b5394a noarch/kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.src.rpm
c0ef5f32caf7d2f29be7afa2cbac2597fc058aa0
ppc/debug/kernel-debuginfo-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.ppc.rpm
4f832cc4c5b962f5c0f4597867150f140ba87ec0 ppc/kernel-smp-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.ppc.rpm
85c4f8facbc2411bb7a7a8628b05aa6466af9450 ppc/kernel-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.ppc.rpm
5519e5597fcb21f7db361d1d73992cdde38db345 ppc/kernel-smp-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.ppc.rpm
87635c4509aad76cb65834cbc15051daa9baf905 ppc/kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.ppc.rpm
ea89068deb06bcb9fe5310be437c007e3345905c ppc/kernel-doc-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.noarch.rpm
b6bb163aa79316a440ed012052e16c2b14f60d38
x86_64/kernel-kdump-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
a35f243808a159cef62f5e4196c20ecbafc6205a x86_64/kernel-xenU-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
28193d547637933f44bc6d0e831c2ea57bb4090e
x86_64/kernel-xen0-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
d76814668e31783992fa232e88484148f1eda8b9
x86_64/kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
dc2df53fbb5b0c0e846b67588aee90d9b91ed490 x86_64/kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
39783f8696d545ac406227c23a3c0b94d3716ccf
x86_64/kernel-xen-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
cf1276facbaba572c8a3053c7d845a22e25893d2
x86_64/kernel-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
4ba2c550c74b4a24ea7618f974bedebfe5f6d058
x86_64/kernel-kdump-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
3b8306557cfeea566a9f2d17a6fd757ded80d5a3 x86_64/kernel-xen-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
ff08811f6ed03007fc332c7d4b84210765c9d754
x86_64/debug/kernel-debuginfo-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
efaf70935cb2f6511a9acb060a2edd0e5d357725 x86_64/kernel-xen0-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.x86_64.rpm
ea89068deb06bcb9fe5310be437c007e3345905c x86_64/kernel-doc-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.noarch.rpm
e6e3b9e1fb4ac3f64d99096e69f1a0db203ece45 i386/kernel-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i586.rpm
fa2043c2df654259f81160a1f8ede0cae484324c
i386/debug/kernel-debuginfo-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i586.rpm
300c118aa8f7c19e67ce431bf4fdbb5c4e58c669 i386/kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i586.rpm
9e624455eb8e17856ad3689103650b50e3523d8d i386/kernel-smp-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
a9dd53070a2935b583b323f45d3ce7e1e115fc79 i386/kernel-xenU-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
2150b8ad3449d6d7f40199c87f5805c15af89fc6 i386/kernel-kdump-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
df653f9d22aff7df3b66e97d64909758f092c32c i386/kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
590ccd6a32de221976e80ca339bfbd5e134d34cd i386/kernel-xen-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
689df924f377160825b1990dfd13f738dfb9b058
i386/kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
5a2b490f3d05ef08e0544333e8fb98258f5b59b3
i386/kernel-xen0-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
35bce15abcc97d222586e224fb46c95f580c8c2c i386/kernel-xen0-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
f008b3e49c50fa0b74dd6b040cbbe5d66c45eaeb
i386/debug/kernel-debuginfo-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
2bed3fd092c06ccb8607a525f83c0eb3cbadd419
i386/kernel-kdump-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
c5ebafe3031208b440d2196205c18076464903c1 i386/kernel-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
165a4d6cb82d490e06326bb3fa09564cf4dd32fd
i386/kernel-smp-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
66550de03c815e6696450c8eb13ca6f4080d3bf1
i386/kernel-xen-devel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm
ea89068deb06bcb9fe5310be437c007e3345905c i386/kernel-doc-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.noarch.rpm
This update can be installed with the 'yum' update program. Use 'yum update
package-name' at the command line. For more information, refer to 'Managing
Software with yum,' available at http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/yum/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
6:06 p.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fedora Test Update Notification
FEDORA-2006-967
2006-09-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Product : Fedora Core 5
Name : kernel
Version : 2.6.17
Release : 1.2187_FC5
is there a need that i must repeat my last mail related to such
announcements mr. jones ?
taaaraaaa !
--
ronald
6:15 p.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Fedora Test Update Notification
> FEDORA-2006-967
> 2006-09-11
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Product : Fedora Core 5
> Name : kernel
> Version : 2.6.17
> Release : 1.2187_FC5
Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be released for
a while?
*******************************************************************************
Gilbert Sebenste ********
(My opinions only!) ******
*******************************************************************************
6:45 p.m.
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
Dave Jones wrote:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Fedora Test Update Notification
>> FEDORA-2006-967
>> 2006-09-11
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Product : Fedora Core 5
>> Name : kernel
>> Version : 2.6.17
>> Release : 1.2187_FC5
Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be released for
a while?
I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing soon
(and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets released), but
as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
Dave
7:08 p.m.
man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:45 -0400, skrev Dave Jones:
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Fedora Test Update Notification
> >> FEDORA-2006-967
> >> 2006-09-11
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Product : Fedora Core 5
> >> Name : kernel
> >> Version : 2.6.17
> >> Release : 1.2187_FC5
>
> Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be released for
> a while?
I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing soon
(and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets released), but
as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
if you do that I believe we would be likely to hit this one:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205305
which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on Development
- David Nielsen
7:27 p.m.
David Nielsen wrote:
man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:45 -0400, skrev Dave Jones:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> > Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> Fedora Test Update Notification
> > >> FEDORA-2006-967
> > >> 2006-09-11
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >> Product : Fedora Core 5
> > >> Name : kernel
> > >> Version : 2.6.17
> > >> Release : 1.2187_FC5
> >
> > Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be released for
> > a while?
>
> I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing soon
> (and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets released), but
> as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
if you do that I believe we would be likely to hit this one:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205305
which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on Development
Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine under the
current rawhide kernel.
7:42 p.m.
man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:27 -0500, skrev Jay Cliburn:
David Nielsen wrote:
> man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:45 -0400, skrev Dave Jones:
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
>> > Dave Jones wrote:
>> >
>> > >>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> Fedora Test Update Notification
>> > >> FEDORA-2006-967
>> > >> 2006-09-11
>> > >>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>
>> > >> Product : Fedora Core 5
>> > >> Name : kernel
>> > >> Version : 2.6.17
>> > >> Release : 1.2187_FC5
>> >
>> > Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be released for
>> > a while?
>>
>> I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing soon
>> (and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets released), but
>> as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
>
> if you do that I believe we would be likely to hit this one:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205305
>
> which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on Development
Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine under the
current rawhide kernel.
Very odd, I and a few others are seeing this, maybe something is loading
wrong modules on certain machines. I had to manually recompile the
kernel to make it stop locking it at the lowest setting (although I
managed to kill scaling as well but I'll take broken scaling at 2.2GHz
over broken scaling at 1GHz)
- David
7:57 p.m.
>>>> "David" == David Nielsen
<david(a)lovesunix.net> writes:
David> man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:27 -0500, skrev Jay Cliburn:
> David Nielsen wrote: > man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:45 -0400, skrev
Dave
> Jones:
> >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> >> > Dave Jones wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> Fedora Test Update Notification >> > >>
FEDORA-2006-967 >>
> > >> 2006-09-11 >> > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Product : Fedora Core 5 >> > >> Name : kernel
>> > >>
> Version : 2.6.17 >> > >> Release : 1.2187_FC5
> >> >
> >> > Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be
> released for >> > a while?
> >>
> >> I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing
> soon >> (and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets
> released), but >> as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
> >
> > if you do that I believe we would be likely to hit this one:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205305
> >
> > which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on Development
>
> Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine
> under the current rawhide kernel.
David> Very odd, I and a few others are seeing this, maybe something
David> is loading wrong modules on certain machines. I had to manually
David> recompile the kernel to make it stop locking it at the lowest
David> setting (although I managed to kill scaling as well but I'll
David> take broken scaling at 2.2GHz over broken scaling at 1GHz)
Amusingly enough, I just got one of these today.
(AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+)
Mine also seems to stick at 1ghz on both cores instead of ramping up
to 2.2ghz (as the cpus are able to).
It looks to me like a bug in the 'ondemand' cpu govener...
If I simply change to performance:
echo "performance" > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor
It goes to 2.2 and stays there. ondemand seems to never raise from the
lowest possible speed here.
David> - David
kevin
8:06 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 18:57 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>>>> "David" == David Nielsen
<david(a)lovesunix.net> writes:
David> man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:27 -0500, skrev Jay Cliburn:
>> David Nielsen wrote: > man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:45 -0400, skrev Dave
>> Jones:
>> >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
>> >> > Dave Jones wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > >> Fedora Test Update Notification >> > >>
FEDORA-2006-967 >>
>> > >> 2006-09-11 >> > >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Product : Fedora Core 5 >> > >> Name :
kernel >> > >>
>> Version : 2.6.17 >> > >> Release : 1.2187_FC5
>> >> >
>> >> > Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be
>> released for >> > a while?
>> >>
>> >> I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing
>> soon >> (and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets
>> released), but >> as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
>> >
>> > if you do that I believe we would be likely to hit this one:
>> >
>> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205305
>> >
>> > which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on Development
>>
>> Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine
>> under the current rawhide kernel.
David> Very odd, I and a few others are seeing this, maybe something
David> is loading wrong modules on certain machines. I had to manually
David> recompile the kernel to make it stop locking it at the lowest
David> setting (although I managed to kill scaling as well but I'll
David> take broken scaling at 2.2GHz over broken scaling at 1GHz)
Amusingly enough, I just got one of these today.
(AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+)
Mine also seems to stick at 1ghz on both cores instead of ramping up
to 2.2ghz (as the cpus are able to).
It looks to me like a bug in the 'ondemand' cpu govener...
If I simply change to performance:
echo "performance" > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor
It goes to 2.2 and stays there. ondemand seems to never raise from the
lowest possible speed here.
David> - David
kevin
I've been noticing under rawhide with my single core Intel Pentium M
that the cpufreq applet reports On Demand and that it only seems to swap
between 600 MHz and 2000 MHz with no steps in between, 30% to 100% to
30% to 100% back to 30%. It used to ramp up and down based on demand but
now just jumps to either extreme. Maybe it's more efficient this way?
tjb
--
=======================================================================
| Thomas Baker email: tjb(a)unh.edu |
| Systems Programmer |
| Research Computing Center voice: (603) 862-4490 |
| University of New Hampshire fax: (603) 862-1761 |
| 332 Morse Hall |
| Durham, NH 03824 USA http://wintermute.sr.unh.edu/~tjb |
=======================================================================
8:23 p.m.
man, 11 09 2006 kl. 18:57 -0600, skrev Kevin Fenzi:
>>>>> "David" == David Nielsen
<david(a)lovesunix.net> writes:
David> man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:27 -0500, skrev Jay Cliburn:
>> David Nielsen wrote: > man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:45 -0400, skrev Dave
>> Jones:
>> >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:15:28PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
>> >> > Dave Jones wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > >> Fedora Test Update Notification >> > >>
FEDORA-2006-967 >>
>> > >> 2006-09-11 >> > >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Product : Fedora Core 5 >> > >> Name :
kernel >> > >>
>> Version : 2.6.17 >> > >> Release : 1.2187_FC5
>> >> >
>> >> > Worksforme. Nicely done. I take it 2.6.18 is not going to be
>> released for >> > a while?
>> >>
>> >> I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing
>> soon >> (and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets
>> released), but >> as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
>> >
>> > if you do that I believe we would be likely to hit this one:
>> >
>> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205305
>> >
>> > which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on Development
>>
>> Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine
>> under the current rawhide kernel.
David> Very odd, I and a few others are seeing this, maybe something
David> is loading wrong modules on certain machines. I had to manually
David> recompile the kernel to make it stop locking it at the lowest
David> setting (although I managed to kill scaling as well but I'll
David> take broken scaling at 2.2GHz over broken scaling at 1GHz)
Amusingly enough, I just got one of these today.
(AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+)
Mine also seems to stick at 1ghz on both cores instead of ramping up
to 2.2ghz (as the cpus are able to).
It looks to me like a bug in the 'ondemand' cpu govener...
If I simply change to performance:
echo "performance" > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor
It goes to 2.2 and stays there. ondemand seems to never raise from the
lowest possible speed here.
tried that, changing the governor doesn't seem to fix the issue on my
machine.
For reference this is a Shuttle SN95G5V3, motherboard is a Shuttle FN95.
I haven't been able to dig up any known issues with that hardware and it
used to work just fine.
- David
8 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 02:42:12AM +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
> > which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on
Development
>
> Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine under the
> current rawhide kernel.
Very odd, I and a few others are seeing this, maybe something is loading
wrong modules on certain machines. I had to manually recompile the
kernel to make it stop locking it at the lowest setting (although I
managed to kill scaling as well but I'll take broken scaling at 2.2GHz
over broken scaling at 1GHz)
I've seen instances where ACPI limits the speed if the CPU is cooking itself,
which judging from the billions of messages about being unable to turn on
the fan, it might be..
I'm wondering if this is an ACPI regression.
I'll point the upstream ACPI people at the bug and see if they have clues.
Dave
8:28 p.m.
David Nielsen wrote:
man, 11 09 2006 kl. 19:27 -0500, skrev Jay Cliburn:
> David Nielsen wrote:
>> which is currently breaking cpu scaling for me on
Development
> Hmmm... I have an AMD64x2 3800+ that scales up to 2 GHz just fine under the
> current rawhide kernel.
Very odd, I and a few others are seeing this, maybe something is loading
wrong modules on certain machines. I had to manually recompile the
kernel to make it stop locking it at the lowest setting (although I
managed to kill scaling as well but I'll take broken scaling at 2.2GHz
over broken scaling at 1GHz)
Odd indeed... Let me go kick the kids off (it's their game machine) and boot to
Fedora. What's a good way to peg the cpus long enough to get cat /proc/cpuinfo
to show the elevated frequency?
8:21 p.m.
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Dave Jones wrote:
I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing
soon
(and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets released), but
as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
Thank you, sir! BTW, remind me: when you show things you change in the
changelog for the emails on the updates-tesing and updates list,
do those changes mean those are the only ones you did, or that they differ
from the published kernel.org kernels? Just the most critical change(s)?
Or is it something else?
*******************************************************************************
Gilbert Sebenste ********
(My opinions only!) ******
*******************************************************************************
10:03 p.m.
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 08:21:16PM -0500, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Dave Jones wrote:
> I'm hoping to get a 2.6.18rc6 based kernel into updates-testing soon
> (and then rebase to .18 for updates-final when that gets released), but
> as usual, xen is throwing a spanner in the works.
Thank you, sir! BTW, remind me: when you show things you change in the
changelog for the emails on the updates-tesing and updates list,
do those changes mean those are the only ones you did, or that they differ
from the published kernel.org kernels? Just the most critical change(s)?
Or is it something else?
Every change should have an entry in the changelog. The only exception
being the "abbreviated" changelogs for the upstream rebases.
For eg..
* Sat Sep 9 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.13
This means that every patch that is listed at
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.17.13
is included in this build, and for more info check there.
every other change, even if its just changing a CONFIG_ option,
should get a changelog entry. Occasionally I'll slip up and
forget to changelog something, but that's usually a rare case.
Dave
10:17 p.m.
Dave Jones writes, re: kernel updates...
Every change should have an entry in the changelog. The only
exception
being the "abbreviated" changelogs for the upstream rebases.
For eg..
* Sat Sep 9 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.17.13
This means that every patch that is listed at
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.17.13
is included in this build, and for more info check there.
every other change, even if its just changing a CONFIG_ option,
should get a changelog entry. Occasionally I'll slip up and
forget to changelog something, but that's usually a rare case.
Got it. Thanks!
*******************************************************************************
Gilbert Sebenste ********
(My opinions only!) ******
Staff Meteorologist, Northern Illinois University ****
E-mail: sebenste(a)weather.admin.niu.edu ***
web: http://weather.admin.niu.edu **
*******************************************************************************
6:47 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 01:06:22AM +0200, ronald wrote:
Dave Jones wrote:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Fedora Test Update Notification
> FEDORA-2006-967
> 2006-09-11
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Product : Fedora Core 5
> Name : kernel
> Version : 2.6.17
> Release : 1.2187_FC5
is there a need that i must repeat my last mail related to such
announcements mr. jones ?
I'm afraid so, my memory is somewhat finite, and whilst I try to read
everything, stuff does occasionally fall through the cracks.
For best results, drop bug reports into bugzilla. (Yes, it's a
complete disaster right now with hundreds of stale lingering bugs,
but I'm working through them [slowly])
Dave
8:18 a.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 01:06:22AM +0200, ronald wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Fedora Test Update Notification
> > FEDORA-2006-967
> > 2006-09-11
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Product : Fedora Core 5
> > Name : kernel
> > Version : 2.6.17
> > Release : 1.2187_FC5
>
> is there a need that i must repeat my last mail related to such
> announcements mr. jones ?
2187
runs + suspends + hibernates + modules
thx
I'm afraid so, my memory is somewhat finite, and whilst I try to read
everything, stuff does occasionally fall through the cracks.
sounds like a need of *extended* memory.
---
i hope it's adequate. let me know, if *not*.
ronald
6:35 p.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fedora Test Update Notification
FEDORA-2006-967
2006-09-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Product : Fedora Core 5
Name : kernel
Version : 2.6.17
Release : 1.2187_FC5
Summary : The Linux kernel (the core of the Linux operating system)
Description :
The kernel package contains the Linux kernel (vmlinuz), the core of any
Linux operating system. The kernel handles the basic functions
of the operating system: memory allocation, process allocation, device
input and output, etc.
This kernel did not find root on my system, probably because the
cpqarray driver couldn't find anything or wasn't loaded. The driver is
included in the initrd-image.
Hardware is Compaq DL380G1 with internal Compaq Smartarray RAID controller.
Browsed through the changelogs, but could not see any changes regarding
this controller.
The kernel I'm running today is 2.6.17-1.2159_FC5 which boots fine.
Does thing give any useful information?
--
Roy-Magne Mo
8:09 p.m.
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:35:17AM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
This kernel did not find root on my system, probably because the
cpqarray driver couldn't find anything or wasn't loaded. The driver is
included in the initrd-image.
Hardware is Compaq DL380G1 with internal Compaq Smartarray RAID controller.
Browsed through the changelogs, but could not see any changes regarding
this controller.
The kernel I'm running today is 2.6.17-1.2159_FC5 which boots fine.
Does thing give any useful information?
Extremely puzzling. I too looked over the changelogs between 2.6.17.6 and
2.6.17.13 and found no smoking gun. The only thing that I could come up
with was a possible ACPI regression. Does booting with acpi=off make
any difference ?
If there's a possibility of serial console, grabbing the dmesg from
working & crashing kernel would be useful for comparison purposes
as that may yield some clues.
Dave
8:30 p.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:35:17AM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
> This kernel did not find root on my system, probably because the
> cpqarray driver couldn't find anything or wasn't loaded. The driver is
> included in the initrd-image.
>
> Hardware is Compaq DL380G1 with internal Compaq Smartarray RAID controller.
>
> Browsed through the changelogs, but could not see any changes regarding
> this controller.
>
> The kernel I'm running today is 2.6.17-1.2159_FC5 which boots fine.
>
> Does thing give any useful information?
Extremely puzzling. I too looked over the changelogs between 2.6.17.6 and
2.6.17.13 and found no smoking gun. The only thing that I could come up
with was a possible ACPI regression. Does booting with acpi=off make
any difference ?
If there's a possibility of serial console, grabbing the dmesg from
working & crashing kernel would be useful for comparison purposes
as that may yield some clues.
There is a possibility yes, I will see what I can accomplish with that
tomorrow. If my memory serves me right, I did not manage to detect this
controller with the FC5 installer either - had to go through FC4 install.
The machine is at a remote location, so I tried with acpi=off now, and
it won't come back to life, so that probably doesn't work either. I'll
try with a serial console tomorrow.
5:24 a.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
If there's a possibility of serial console, grabbing the dmesg from
working & crashing kernel would be useful for comparison purposes
as that may yield some clues.
Log from serial console:
http://www.sunnmore.net/div/willie-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.cap
It does seem like the cpqarray has been loaded and has detected the
logical drives.
2:01 p.m.
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:24:31PM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
Dave Jones wrote:
>
> If there's a possibility of serial console, grabbing the dmesg from
> working & crashing kernel would be useful for comparison purposes
> as that may yield some clues.
Log from serial console:
http://www.sunnmore.net/div/willie-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.cap
It does seem like the cpqarray has been loaded and has detected the
logical drives.
Can you put up a dmesg from the working kernel too? The diff between
the two may show something. Though right now, it's a real head-scratcher.
I've no idea what the problem could be yet.
Dave
2:06 p.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:24:31PM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > If there's a possibility of serial console, grabbing the dmesg from
> > working & crashing kernel would be useful for comparison purposes
> > as that may yield some clues.
>
> Log from serial console:
>
> http://www.sunnmore.net/div/willie-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.cap
>
> It does seem like the cpqarray has been loaded and has detected the
> logical drives.
Can you put up a dmesg from the working kernel too? The diff between
the two may show something. Though right now, it's a real head-scratcher.
I've no idea what the problem could be yet.
Here's one from 2.6.17-1.2159
http://www.sunnmore.net/div/willie-2.6.17-1.2159_FC5.cap
--
Roy-Magne Mo
2:49 p.m.
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 09:06:58PM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:24:31PM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
> > Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > If there's a possibility of serial console, grabbing the dmesg from
> > > working & crashing kernel would be useful for comparison purposes
> > > as that may yield some clues.
> >
> > Log from serial console:
> >
> > http://www.sunnmore.net/div/willie-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5.cap
> >
> > It does seem like the cpqarray has been loaded and has detected the
> > logical drives.
>
> Can you put up a dmesg from the working kernel too? The diff between
> the two may show something. Though right now, it's a real head-scratcher.
> I've no idea what the problem could be yet.
Here's one from 2.6.17-1.2159
http://www.sunnmore.net/div/willie-2.6.17-1.2159_FC5.cap
Ok, the important difference is this ..
Loading dm-snapshot.ko module
-Making device-mapper control node
-Scanning logical volumes
- Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
- Found volume group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
-Activating logical volumes
- 3 logical volume(s) in volume group "VolGroup00" now active
Trying to resume from /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01
Peter, any recent mkinitrd changes that could explain this ?
Dave
11:23 a.m.
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 15:49 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Ok, the important difference is this ..
Loading dm-snapshot.ko module
-Making device-mapper control node
-Scanning logical volumes
- Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
- Found volume group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
-Activating logical volumes
- 3 logical volume(s) in volume group "VolGroup00" now active
Trying to resume from /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01
Peter, any recent mkinitrd changes that could explain this ?
Not really - though I have seen some reports similar to this. Generally
it's happening when lvm segfaults during mkinitrd -- that manifests as
not having any volume groups active, which means we don't include lvm
(and thus don't start your volume group) during bootup.
--
Peter
1:35 p.m.
Peter Jones wrote:
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 15:49 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> Ok, the important difference is this ..
>
> Loading dm-snapshot.ko module
> -Making device-mapper control node
> -Scanning logical volumes
> - Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
> - Found volume group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
> -Activating logical volumes
> - 3 logical volume(s) in volume group "VolGroup00" now active
> Trying to resume from /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01
>
> Peter, any recent mkinitrd changes that could explain this ?
Not really - though I have seen some reports similar to this. Generally
it's happening when lvm segfaults during mkinitrd -- that manifests as
not having any volume groups active, which means we don't include lvm
(and thus don't start your volume group) during bootup.
There is a empty logical disk on this raid controller I haven't put into
use yet - could this have anything to do with things? It's of course the
same under both kernels.
6:48 a.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
Loading dm-snapshot.ko module
-Making device-mapper control node
-Scanning logical volumes
- Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
- Found volume group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
-Activating logical volumes
- 3 logical volume(s) in volume group "VolGroup00" now active
Trying to resume from /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01
Still seeing this with 2.6.17-1.3001, but I do suspect this is because
the lvm-utilities is segfaulting during mkinitrd, so the initrd is
broken - and the kernel itself is ok.
I've registered a BZ for it:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207474
Does this sound sane?
--
Roy-Magne Mo
11:23 a.m.
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:48:06PM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
Dave Jones wrote:
> Loading dm-snapshot.ko module
> -Making device-mapper control node
> -Scanning logical volumes
> - Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
> - Found volume group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
> -Activating logical volumes
> - 3 logical volume(s) in volume group "VolGroup00" now active
> Trying to resume from /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01
Still seeing this with 2.6.17-1.3001, but I do suspect this is because
the lvm-utilities is segfaulting during mkinitrd, so the initrd is
broken - and the kernel itself is ok.
I've registered a BZ for it:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207474
Does this sound sane?
Gaaaagrgh. device-mapper. I hates it. Hate hate hate.
This may be the reason a number of people were affected by
this when upgrading from FC4->FC5. I'll release note this
in the next kernel update I push.
Thanks for your investigation into this.
Dave
11:28 a.m.
Dave Jones wrote:
Gaaaagrgh. device-mapper. I hates it. Hate hate hate.
This may be the reason a number of people were affected by
this when upgrading from FC4->FC5. I'll release note this
in the next kernel update I push.
Thanks for your investigation into this.
no problem :)
--
Roy-Magne Mo
8:37 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 12:23 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:48:06PM +0200, Roy-Magne Mo wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
> > Loading dm-snapshot.ko module
> > -Making device-mapper control node
> > -Scanning logical volumes
> > - Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
> > - Found volume group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
> > -Activating logical volumes
> > - 3 logical volume(s) in volume group "VolGroup00" now active
> > Trying to resume from /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01
>
>
> Still seeing this with 2.6.17-1.3001, but I do suspect this is because
> the lvm-utilities is segfaulting during mkinitrd, so the initrd is
> broken - and the kernel itself is ok.
>
> I've registered a BZ for it:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207474
>
> Does this sound sane?
Gaaaagrgh. device-mapper. I hates it. Hate hate hate.
This may be the reason a number of people were affected by
this when upgrading from FC4->FC5. I'll release note this
in the next kernel update I push.
Thanks for your investigation into this.
It should be noted that in current mkinitrd we're always using
lvm.static . This is as of Sep 1, version 5.1.10-1 .
--
Peter
7:44 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 16:22 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fedora Test Update Notification
FEDORA-2006-967
2006-09-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Product : Fedora Core 5
Name : kernel
Version : 2.6.17
Release : 1.2187_FC5
Summary : The Linux kernel (the core of the Linux operating system)
Description :
The kernel package contains the Linux kernel (vmlinuz), the core of any
Linux operating system. The kernel handles the basic functions
of the operating system: memory allocation, process allocation, device
input and output, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Update Information:
An update to the latest upstream -stable release (2.6.17.13)
I'm still seeing the problem with resume not working with my nvidia card
using the 'nv' driver. I've filed a bug report on this here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205170
I've filed against xorg-x11-drv-nv, but someone suggested that it may be
a kernel / xorg conflict so I'm mentioning it here.
R.
--
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
It's much better on my side"
6452
days inactive
6463
days old
32 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Dave Jones -
David Nielsen -
Gilbert Sebenste -
Jay Cliburn -
Kevin Fenzi -
Peter Jones -
Rodd Clarkson -
Ronald Warsow -
Roy-Magne Mo -
Thomas J. Baker