linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Sept 6 (does not boot on AMD64)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 6 Sep 2012 15:35:39 +0200
From:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Sept 6 (does not boot on AMD64)

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Changes since 20120905:
>>
>> New tree: arm64
>>
>> The powerpc tree gained a build failure for which I reverted 3 commits.
>>
>> The net-next tree lost its build failure.
>>
>> The trivial tree gained a conflict against the powerpc tree.
>>
>> The spi-mb tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
>> next-20120905.
>>
>> The driver-core tree gained a build failure (form an interaction with the
>> workqueues tree) for which I applied a merge fix patch.
>>
>> The tty tree gained a build failure for which I applied a patch.
>>
>> The staging tree lost its build failure.
>>
>> The arm-soc tree gained a conflict against the usb tree.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Unfortunately, today's linux-next does not boot here on Ubuntu/precise AMD64.
> My yesterday's next-20120905 is fine.
>
> I throw out all my additional patches an rebuild again as "-2", but
> this linux-image does not boot.
> It's in very early stage.
> I removed "quiet" etc. from kernel-command-line, but this reveals not much more.
>
> From the attached kernel-config.diff:
> Dunno why the 2nd is disabled now and try to turn off the 1st one in a
> "-3" build.
>
> +CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_CPB=y
> -CONFIG_USB_LIBUSUAL=y
>

[ CC Rafael (cpufreq sub-maintainer) ]

I hacked to turn off CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_CPB, but this is not the
root cause.
Not sure why this setting is default YES, Rafael?

To switch from upstart to systemd does not help.

- Sedat -

> If you know of a culprit or see anything in the kernel-config.diff let me know.
>
> Regards,
> - Sedat -

Download attachment "0001-cpufreq-Disable-CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_CPB-by-defau.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (774 bytes)