On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 05:01:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 06:23:10PM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 11:32:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > Subject : kernels fail to boot with drives on ATIIXP controller > > > (ACPI/IRQ related) > > > References : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229621 > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/4/257 > > > Submitter : Michal Jaegermann <michal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Status : unknown > > > > I have now even better one with pata_via. A kernel, which for > > all practical purposes is 2.6.21-rc5, not only refuses to boot > > (and I cannot find some option combination which would allow me to > > do so anyway) but simply refuses to read _any_ data from a media. > > This included a partitioning information. > > > > Earlier kernel on the same hardware boots without raising any fuss. > > > > Details are collected as > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234650 > > If I understand this correctly, a plain 2.6.20 kernel is already broken? You mean that a quoted report talks about 2.6.20-1.3025.fc7 kernel? These are vagaries of kernel version numbering in Fedora. Changelogs are not that clear but it appears that 2.6.19-1.2911.6.4.fc6 will be actually closer to 2.6.20. That kernel from a bug report is really, for all intents and purposes, 2.6.21-rc5 (if I am not misreading something). I am afraid that I do not have at this moment an easy to way to check "plain" 2.6.20 on the hardware in question. It appears that the essential difference is that a working kernel is using and old IDE driver, and sees the drive - in this case - as /dev/hdc, while the current one tries to go through libata and chockes uncontrollably. Michal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
