[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Trouble with 2.6.21-5 on Cobalt Qube2



Hi Martin,

On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 12:59:58 +0200
Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> wrote:

> > I've been trying without success to boot my Cobalt Qube2 with the
> > latest kernel 2.6.21-5. It fails to boot because of this error/problem
> > with the IDE driver:
> > 
> > Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver Revision: 7.00alpha2
> > ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx
> > VP_IDE: IDE controller at PCI slot 0000:00:09.1
> > VP_IDE: chipset revision 6
> > VP_IDE: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
> > VP_IDE: VIA vt82c586a (rev 27) IDE UDMA33 controller on pci0000:00:09.1
> >    ide0: BM-DMA at 0x1420-0x1427, BIOS settings: hda:pio, hdb:pio
> >    ide1: BM-DMA at 0x1428-0x142f, BIOS settings: hdc:pio, hdd:pio
> > ide0: I/O resource 0xF00003F6-0xF00003F6 not free.
> > ide0: ports already in use, skipping probe
> > ide1: I/O resource 0xF0000376-0xF0000376 not free.
> > ide1: ports already in use, skipping probe
> > ide0: I/O resource 0xF00003F6-0xF00003F6 not free.
> > ide0: ports already in use, skipping probe
> > ide1: I/O resource 0xF0000376-0xF0000376 not free.
> > ide1: ports already in use, skipping probe
> > TCP bic registered
> > NET: Registered protocol family 1
> > NET: Registered protocol family 17
> > VFS: Cannot open root device "hda2" or unknown-block(0,0)
> > Please append a correct "root=" boot option
> 
> I don't have access to my Cobalt hardware at the moment, so the 2.6.21
> kernel in the archive isn't tested.  I'm CCing Yoichi Yuasa who might
> be able to know whether there is a problem with 2.6.21 (note that
> we're using CONFIG_BLK_DEV_VIA82CXXX, not the PATA driver).

I proposed the patch for this problem. 

http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2007-01/msg00049.html

But, it has not been accepted. 
One temporary solution is to use CONFIG_PATA_VIA. 
In that case, the device name is changed from /dev/hd* to /dev/sd*.

Yoichi



Reply to: