Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 436681
Description
Need Real Name
2008-03-09 08:26:02 UTC
Created attachment 297349 [details]
Screenshot of the boot screen
Created attachment 297350 [details]
output of lspci -vv on
lspci and cat /proc/interrupts on working 2.6.23.15-137:
[root@darkstar log]# cat /proc/interrupts
CPU0 CPU1
0: 252 0 IO-APIC-edge timer
1: 5793 0 IO-APIC-edge i8042
7: 0 0 IO-APIC-edge parport0
8: 1 0 IO-APIC-edge rtc
9: 1 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi acpi
16: 565 9619871 IO-APIC-fasteoi uhci_hcd:usb3, ahci, eth0,
nvidia
17: 95293 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi libata, eth1
18: 0 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi ehci_hcd:usb1, uhci_hcd:usb7
19: 4179091 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi ehci_hcd:usb2, uhci_hcd:usb5
20: 0 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi uhci_hcd:usb4
21: 506004 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi uhci_hcd:usb6, libata, libata
22: 400 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi HDA Intel
23: 3 761 IO-APIC-fasteoi firewire_ohci
NMI: 0 0
LOC: 14830027 13809719
ERR: 0
MIS: 0
I'm just curious, this isn't a ThinkPad X61 or T61 by any chance? IBM has a BIOS update on their site which fixes an issue which looks very similar (mind, not Lenovo's site). Created attachment 297384 [details]
Output of dmesg
Created attachment 297385 [details]
Output of /proc/interrupts
Created attachment 297386 [details]
Output of lspci
Created attachment 297387 [details]
Screenshot # 1 of problem during bootup
Created attachment 297388 [details]
Screenshot # 2 of problem during bootup
Created attachment 297389 [details]
Screenshot # 3 of problem during bootup
Created attachment 297391 [details]
Screenshot # 1 of problem during bootup (smaller file size)
Created attachment 297392 [details]
Screenshot # 2 of problem during bootup (smaller file size)
Created attachment 297393 [details]
Screenshot # 3 of problem during bootup (smaller file size)
Created attachment 297394 [details]
Screenshot # 4 of problem during bootup (smaller file size)
Created attachment 297395 [details]
Screenshot # 5 of problem during bootup (smaller file size)
I ran into the exact same problem when I upgraded from 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 to 2.6.24.3-12.fc8. Its an Intel Core Duo Dell Inspiron 530 with the latest firmware - 1.0.10. I've attached the output of dmesg, lspci and /proc/interrupts taken when booted in the 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 kernel. The screenshots show the problem happening when booting the 2.6.24.3-12.fc8 kernel. I'll be happy to try any debug kernel rpm. Regards, Harsha Srinath HW is an Standard PC, Intel Core(TM)2 6600, MSI P965 Platinum Motherboard I get a very similar error on a PC with a MSI P965 Neo mainboard. This error happened earlier but was fixed. It's now back with 2.6.24.3. See bug #242561. Is there a way to log the kernel messages of an unsuccessful boot without a serial console on another PC? For the record, the IRQ in question is 20. irqpoll seems to solve the problem, however previously using "irqpoll" meant far worse performance/reponsiveness. This bug is still present with kernel-2.6.24.4-64.fc8 I just installed Fedora rawhide on a computer with an ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe motherboard and it look's like I'm having the same problem with kernel-2.6.25-8.fc9.i686. However, it's possible to work around this by changing some BIOS-Options: Within the BIOS-Setup you can set "Onboard IDE Operate Mode" to "Enhanced Mode" or "Compatible Mode". If set to "Enhanced Mode" you can select if enhanced mode is active for "P-ATA+S-ATA", "S-ATA" or "P-ATA". When set to "P-ATA+S-ATA" the afore mentioned problem occurs. But setting this to "S-ATA" makes the problem go away and it's possible to boot without "irqpoll". I don't know if these changes are directly related to the problem or if they just mix up the configuration a little, so that the problem no longer occurs. If you need more information about my system, please just tell me what exactly you need. Great - that was an excellent hint IDE vs. AHCI is the key ! I set everything to AHCI on my MSI P965 Platinum and now I can boot just fine and everything seems to work - finally a current kernel again... This will of course will still be a show stopper for people who dual-boot with legacy operating systems as they probably need the IDE emulation... I have the same problem with DFI LanParty DK X38 T2RB motherboard (quick solution is to boot with irqpoll). I tried to switch to AHCI, but then i can't boot Fedora 9 (newest kernel, 2.6.25.3). Error: mount: could not find filesystem '/dev/root' Probably I need to change grub and fstab settings but I don't know how. First I change all partitions UUID to physical path (i.e. /dev/sda1), but still it doesn't help. Grub? Or do I have to reinstall Fedora? (In reply to comment #21) > I have the same problem with DFI LanParty DK X38 T2RB motherboard (quick > solution is to boot with irqpoll). > I tried to switch to AHCI, but then i can't boot Fedora 9 (newest kernel, > 2.6.25.3). > Error: > mount: could not find filesystem '/dev/root' > Probably I need to change grub and fstab settings but I don't know how. First I > change all partitions UUID to physical path (i.e. /dev/sda1), but still it > doesn't help. Grub? You should keep the UUID references as they will be valid even when you switch to AHCI. Physical paths might change. My guess is that the kernel's initrd doesn't contain the ahci module. If that's the case, the kernel won't be able to access the hard drive and won't be able to mount the filesystem. You'd have to create a new initrd and force the ahci module to be included. Don't know how to do that, though... Then it's easier for me to simply reinstall Fedora with AHCI enabled. But there should be some "bigger" warning about this problem for other users. Common bugs? This message is a reminder that Fedora 8 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 8. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '8'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 8's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 8 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |