Bug#330583: marked as done (linux-image-2.6.12-1-k7: pdc202xx - system doesn't boot with kernel 2.6.12)
Your message dated Mon, 07 Nov 2005 08:53:32 -0700
with message-id <1131378813.10101.99.camel@localhost>
and subject line Bug#330583: Problem solved
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 28 Sep 2005 18:59:32 +0000
>From boris.kleibl@gmx.at Wed Sep 28 11:59:31 2005
Return-path: <boris.kleibl@gmx.at>
Received: from unet-lmtp.univie.ac.at (imap.unet.univie.ac.at) [131.130.221.38]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EKh9N-00064h-00; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:59:30 -0700
Received: from landsteiner.zifotronic (chello062178074188.25.11.univie.teleweb.at [62.178.74.188])
by imap.unet.univie.ac.at (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8SIxJVc064290;
Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:59:22 +0200
Message-Id: <200509281859.j8SIxJVc064290@imap.unet.univie.ac.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Boris Kleibl <boris.kleibl@gmx.at>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: linux-image-2.6.12-1-k7: pdc202xx - system doesn't boot with kernel 2.6.12
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.17
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:59:18 +0200
X-DCC-ZID-Univie-Metrics: mx9.univie.ac.at 4248; bulk Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=56
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Package: linux-image-2.6.12-1-k7
Version: 2.6.12-10
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks the whole system
After installing kernel-image-2.6-k7_2.6.12-7 the system doesn't boot
anymore giving the following error messages:
hdh: dma_intr: status = 0x51 { DriveReady SeekCompleteError}
hdh: dma_intr: error = 0x10 { SectorIdNotFound }
pdc202xx_new:
ide: failed opcode was: unknown
The error appears for all of my 4 harddisks. This error comes also on kernel-image-2.6-k7_2.6.12-8,
kernel-image-2.6-k7_2.6.12-9 and kernel-image-2.6-k7_2.6.12-10, but
booting with a 2.6.11-k7 kernel gives no problem. I tried to give the
kernel-parameter ide=nodma, but this has no effekt.
I have a Promise Ultra 133 TX2 (pdc202xx_new) ATA-adapter with 4
harddisks (hde = WDC WD800JB (WindowsXP), hdf = Seagate ST360021A (Data),
hdg = Samsung SP0812N (Linux), hdh = Seagate ST330621A (Media)). My
mainboard is an ASRock K7VT4A Pro (VIA KT400A): hda=DVD-Rom,
hdc=DVD-Writer.
What is the problem? I found no issues googleing the internet.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-1-k7
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.12-1-k7 depends on:
ii coreutils [fileutils] 5.2.1-2.1 The GNU core utilities
ii initrd-tools 0.1.82 tools to create initrd image for p
ii module-init-tools 3.2-pre9-1 tools for managing Linux kernel mo
linux-image-2.6.12-1-k7 recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 330583-done) by bugs.debian.org; 7 Nov 2005 15:54:23 +0000
>From dannf@dannf.org Mon Nov 07 07:54:23 2005
Return-path: <dannf@dannf.org>
Received: from colo.lackof.org [198.49.126.79]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EZ9KA-0006hy-00; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 07:54:22 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by colo.lackof.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45D1A360004;
Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:01:26 -0700 (MST)
Received: from colo.lackof.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (colo.lackof.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 12020-06; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:01:25 -0700 (MST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by colo.lackof.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08AB2298026;
Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:01:24 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Re: Bug#330583: Problem solved
From: dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org>
To: 330583@bugs.debian.org, Boris Kleibl <boris.kleibl@gmx.at>
Cc: 330583-done@bugs.debian.org
In-Reply-To: <436F2596.9010001@gmx.at>
References: <436F2596.9010001@gmx.at>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 08:53:32 -0700
Message-Id: <1131378813.10101.99.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at lackof.org
Delivered-To: 330583-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 10:59 +0100, Boris Kleibl wrote:
> Uff, I solved the problem, but what happened?
>
> As some days ago the new linux-image-2.6.14 was availlable, I did a
> fresh debian sid installation. Booting the system shows the same problem
> as mentioned above too. Hmmm! I tried to boot from a KNOPPIX 4.0.2 Live
> CD, it started up to the desktop, but showed the harddisk as not
> mountable! What the hell ... Perhaps the harddisk has a failure? I
> checked the mentioned drive with seagate seatools - all tests succeeded
> except the filesystem-test which shows a damaged master boot record.
> Strange! I tested the drive with the linux and windows tools not showing
> me any errors. So I deleted the vfat partition with windows and then the
> reboot with debian/sid 2.6.14 succeeded! Yippee! Now I wrote a new
> DOS-FAT on the drive, partitioned and formatted and all is ok.
>
> What changed between kernel 2.6.12 and kernel 2.6.13/14 so that the
> error got evidently?
Hard to say - could've been something in the code itself, or a result of
better hardware detection by either initramfs-tools or yaird. Either
way, I'm glad your problem went away. Thanks for letting us know.
Reply to: