On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:10 AM, John David Anglin <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 28 May 2011, Thibaut VARENE wrote: Sorry for the late answer, I got slightly off-track lately. >> BTW, I'm still running 2.6.22.19 on most these machines, and I've kind >> of lost track: do we have a known better kernel I could safely upgrade >> to? > > For the rp3440, the answer is definitely yes. ÂUnfortunately, 2.6.39 > stable doesn't have the pata_cmd64x patch needed for DVD drive, or > James' latest cache fix. ÂSo, I moved on. > > I think the random segfault issue present on pa8800 and pa8900 machines > is largely fixed in 3.0.0-rc1, but it is clear linux kernels are much like > wine. ÂI think USB support for the rp3440 is broken and causes HPMCs. > So, I have it disabled. So, I'm not sure what to make of it: what would be the preferred stable SMP kernel for pa8800/8900 machines as of now? Note I'm not using udev anymore on any of my machines. > At this time, there is no released stable kernel that I consider reliable > on hppa. ÂHowever, most recent kernel releases work ok on UP machines. > Of course, my testing tends to be with CPU intensive applications. > > I am convinced that the rapid development methodology used by linux isn't > suited to ports with limited support. ÂIdeally, we should pick the next > kernel designated for longterm support and patch it. I've been making similar claims in the past, so I can only concur. Unfortunately the time I can personally devote to palinux is asymptotically nearing 0 ;P > For your other machines, the cache issues are less severe because > they support non equivalent aliasing. ÂHowever, don't throw away 2.6.22.19 > because udev-266 is broken without libc6-2.13. ÂInstalling udev-266 > without libc6-2.13 will crash your machine at boot if your kernel uses > udev. ÂUSB support is broken without it, so recovery can be tricky. not using udev anymore, after having had to face too many breakages to remember, and deeming udev useless on headless with servers non-hotswapable hardware anyway... > I would say your other machines need updating even if the process is > somewhat rocky as that's the only way a broadbased release can be tested. Well I can assign one machine (the a500, being easy to reboot/fix as it is) to testing kernels, but for a stable kernel suitable for the machines I'm e.g. assigning to the GCC Compile Farm[0], what would be a good SMP kernel version to choose? I'm looking for the same level of hassle-freeness as 2.6.22.19 since these machines are under relatively heavy load and I cannot afford to tend to their care on a daily basis ;-) Thanks for your help! T-Bone [0] http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm -- Thibaut VARENE http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
