Re: Possibly erroneous "device not present" message during boot
- To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Possibly erroneous "device not present" message during boot
- From: Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 18:11:07 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20170504171107.GQ21008@copernicus.org.uk>
- In-reply-to: <20170425130915.GJ21008@copernicus.org.uk>
- References: <5da70b28-660f-0003-0233-72f929998e4e@cloud85.net> <20170423194639.GI21008@copernicus.org.uk> <24042017190133.bee43a803d4d@desktop.copernicus.org.uk> <20170424201016.GA13997@alum> <20170425130915.GJ21008@copernicus.org.uk>
On Tue 25 Apr 2017 at 14:09:15 +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Mon 24 Apr 2017 at 15:10:16 -0500, David Wright wrote:
>
> > On Mon 24 Apr 2017 at 19:37:22 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > >
> > > A modicum of reassurance and help is never wasted, particularly for
> > > those users who come to this thread in the future.
> > >
> > > My laptop has a single slotted reader on the PCI bus.
> >
> > Before booting, can you see the SD card's device in the CMOS screens?
>
> No. Hard disk and CD are the only offerings. That's with the card in the
> slot when the machine is started.
>
> > > The installer
> > > boots and shows that mmc_core has been loaded. When it gets to the
> > > partitioning stage the SD card is not offered as an option. The
> > > module mmc_block is absent from 'lsmod' and does not appear when the
> > > card is taken out and reinserted. It is not detected.
> >
> > If there's no driver, would you expect the kernel to react?
>
> I would not. But your remark caused *me* to react by taking a closer
> look at the modules loaded on Jessie.
>
> brian@laptop:~$ lsmod | grep mmc
> mmc_block 30466 0
> mmc_core 91803 4 mmc_block,sdhci,tifm_sd,sdhci_pci
> brian@laptop:~$ lsmod | grep tifm
> tifm_sd 17060 0
> tifm_7xx1 12769 0
> tifm_core 13113 2 tifm_7xx1,tifm_sd
> mmc_core 91803 4 mmc_block,sdhci,tifm_sd,sdhci_pci
>
> 'rmmod tifm_7xx1' causes /dev/mmcblk01p to disappear. Booting without it
> present leads to no device file. Stating the obvious, the card will not
> work without the tifm_7xx1 module.
>
> In the installer tifm_7xx1 should be in /lib/modules/,,,,./drivers/misc/.
> It is not present.
>
> > Is there an mmc driver in that installation moduoles screen?
>
> No.
>
> > It might be hard to spot, but is there a /proc/interrupts file,
> > and does the number of interrupts increase on the appropriate line
> > when you insert and remove the card?
> >
> > How do you find the line. On my laptop with that sort of SD card,
> > 18: 2344 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi mmc0
> > the 2344 increases by 1 when I take the card out and by many when
> > I reinsert it. I don't know if mmc_core can provide that line in
> > the absense of mmc_block. (Obviously my kernel has both loaded now.)
>
> In the installer environment that number does not change when the card
> is taken out and pushed back in. In the Jessie environment it changes
> all the time, card in or out.
>
> > > What is unusual is that the card is detected by a Jessie OS on being
> > > inserted. Is this an installer problem with different hardware (my
> > > laptop's is described in another post) or with the card? Basically,
> > > is an installation to an SD card on a PCI bus a case of hit or miss?
>
> It very much looks like an installer bug. It is present on Stretch and
> Jessie.
>
> The hardware:
>
> brian@laptop:~$ lspci | grep Texas > 00:10.0 CardBus bridge: Texas Instruments PCIxx21/x515 Cardbus Controller
> 00:10.2 FireWire (IEEE 1394): Texas Instruments OHCI Compliant IEEE 1394 Host Controller > 00:10.3 Mass storage controller: Texas Instruments PCIxx21 Integrated FlashMedia Controller
> 00:10.4 SD Host controller: Texas Instruments PCI6411/6421/6611/6621/7411/7421/7611/7621 Secure Digital Controller
We have a happy ending:
http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/l/linux/linux_4.9.25-1_changelog
linux (4.9.25-1) unstable; urgency=medium
* udeb: Add tifm_7xx1 to mmc-modules (Closes: #861195)
The modicum of help wasn't wasted. Kudos to everyone who participated in
this thread. :)
--
Brian.
Reply to: