On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Mauro Santos via arch-general <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 23-12-2016 13:58, Carsten Mattner via arch-general wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:59 PM, fredbezies via arch-general >> <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> I'm facing an annoying bug with linux 4.9-1 kernel on my 6 or 7 years >>> old Toshiba Laptop. When I try to make it boot on with linux 4.9-1 >>> kernel, it freeze right after loading initramfs. >>> >>> 4.8.xx kernel was working flawlessly. My eeePC (nearly 9 years old) >>> and my desktop computer (which is AMD based) are both starting with >>> linux 4.9. >>> >>> I opened a bug : https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/52246 >>> >>> Here is my lspci. If someone can help me finding what is happening, >>> I'll be very happy : >>> >>> 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation Mobile 4 Series Chipset Memory >>> Controller Hub (rev 07) >>> 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 4 Series >>> Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 07) >>> 00:02.1 Display controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 4 Series Chipset >>> Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 07) >>> 00:1a.0 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB >>> UHCI Controller #4 (rev 03) >>> 00:1a.1 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB >>> UHCI Controller #5 (rev 03) >>> 00:1a.7 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB2 >>> EHCI Controller #2 (rev 03) >>> 00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) HD Audio >>> Controller (rev 03) >>> 00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express >>> Port 1 (rev 03) >>> 00:1c.1 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express >>> Port 2 (rev 03) >>> 00:1c.4 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express >>> Port 5 (rev 03) >>> 00:1d.0 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB >>> UHCI Controller #1 (rev 03) >>> 00:1d.1 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB >>> UHCI Controller #2 (rev 03) >>> 00:1d.2 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB >>> UHCI Controller #3 (rev 03) >>> 00:1d.3 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB >>> UHCI Controller #6 (rev 03) >>> 00:1d.7 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB2 >>> EHCI Controller #1 (rev 03) >>> 00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge (rev 93) >>> 00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation ICH9M LPC Interface Controller (rev 03) >>> 00:1f.2 SATA controller: Intel Corporation 82801IBM/IEM >>> (ICH9M/ICH9M-E) 4 port SATA Controller [AHCI mode] (rev 03) >>> 00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) SMBus Controller (rev 03) >>> 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. >>> RTL8101/2/6E PCI Express Fast/Gigabit Ethernet controller (rev 02) >>> 03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR242x / AR542x Wireless >>> Network Adapter (PCI-Express) (rev 01) >> >> Does the fallback boot entry work? >> >> Have you tried reinstalling the kernel? >> >> I wish arch would (like other distros) keep 2 or three old kernel >> versions around because it doesn't take any space to do so >> and works around boot bugs in new kernels. >> > > Care to explain how "doesn't take any space" works? Last time I checked > files do take up space. There is an LTS kernel in the repos, which you > can have installed exactly for things like this. While writing that I knew somebody would read it in strict interpretation mode. s/no space/not enough space in \/boot to matter/ > There is also the matter of automagic bootloader configuration change to > support that, not to mention people that use efistub to boot their > system, how do you propose to handle that? If you have installed archlinux, it's reasonable to expect that one knows how to configure this. >> If this is a regression you will have to post dmesg. If you don't see >> errors/warnings, then kernel developers would usually ask to enable >> debug flags for printing more information during boot. >> >> That said, I have one old machine with a Core2Duo and GM4xx and >> ever since DRM's atomic modesetting was introduced in 4.2, I can >> only use 4.1 warning free. Regressions do happen but you had no >> warnings or errors in 4.8 so yours looks like a different regression. >> > > If you don't report the bugs upstream they don't get fixed, if you have > reported it and no one got around to take a look at it then fine, > otherwise don't be lazy and report those bugs and help get them fixed. I did report it and it's been written off as "why do you care about the new warning/stacktrace?". Given that I didn't bother trying to convince the DRM devs of the importance since I don't have a RHEL or SLES support contract I pay for.
