Re: Using newer hardware

David A Rusling (rusling@linux.reo.dec.com)
Thu, 05 Dec 1996 17:51:01 +0000

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Deryk Barker: "Stupil MILO question"
Previous message: Stephen J. Gaudet: "Re: 500mhz alpha"
Maybe in reply to: Daryll Strauss: "Using newer hardware"
Next in thread: Deryk Barker: "Stupil MILO question"
Reply: Deryk Barker: "Stupil MILO question"

>
> I mentioned before the box I'm trying to get Red Hat running on. In
> order to get off the group I borrowed a NCR 825 card. That got Red Hat's
> version of Linux on the disk and behaving itself.
>
> Now I need to support my Adaptec 2940UW and the Dec FDDI cards. Both of
> those are standard in the 2.0.25 kernels. I got the approriate patches
> off the net, applied them to the sources, configured a new kernel, and it
> built. I copied the vmlinux to / and gziped it. I also grabbed milo
> 2.0.25 from gatekeeper, and set up two OSs in the ARC loader, one that
> loads my Red Hat kernel with Red Hat Milo and one that loads my new
> kernel (2.0.25) with the Dec (2.0.25) Milo.
>
> Unforetunely, I can't get my newly compiled kernel to boot. Milo starts
> up, does its hardware check and finds the NCR card (I haven't even
> plugged in the Adaptec yet) and its devices. I then see the hash marks
> (loading my kernel I would assume) but right after that it resets back
> to Milo.
>

In an earlier mail you said that the MILO recognised the Adaptec happily?
So, in this test are you booting a kernel that understands NCR+Adaptec via
an NCR+Adaptec MILO? What filesystem is MILO loading from? DOS or EXT2?
Does MILO say 'jumping to kernel' just before the system resets?

> Other than that I'm not sure what else is worth mentioning. I've been
> having a lot of stability problems with the 2.0.18 kernel. I'll be
> building away and it will hang. It'll be linking vmlinux and claim Oops
> couldn't page in virtual address xxxx. Lots of weird behavior. I hope
> there isn't some hardware problem making this whole thing more difficult.
>
> I'm stuck at this point. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
> - |Daryll

I'm running 2.0.27 and it's very stable. I've put a PC164 kernel (2.0.25)
onto gatekeeper (into blah/Miniloader/kernels/pc164*) and this is the kernel
tree that my PC164 MILO image was built against. Come to think of it, 2.0.18
was very stable, the only stability that I saw recently was my home Intel boxes
reluctance to run Netscape properly (network timeouts) with 2.0.26.

Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
David A Rusling Principal Engineer
European Semiconductor Applications Digital Equipment Co Ltd.,
Engineering PO Box 121,
Imperial Way,
Worton Grange
Reading RG2 0TU
Linux, Alpha, StrongArm, PCI Tel: UK-(0)1734-204380
Fax: UK-(0)1734-203133
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
To unsubscribe: send e-mail to axp-list-request@redhat.com with
'unsubscribe' as the subject.  Do not send it to axp-list@redhat.com

Next message: Deryk Barker: "Stupil MILO question"
Previous message: Stephen J. Gaudet: "Re: 500mhz alpha"
Maybe in reply to: Daryll Strauss: "Using newer hardware"
Next in thread: Deryk Barker: "Stupil MILO question"
Reply: Deryk Barker: "Stupil MILO question"