[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Module problem on amd64
Paul Goyette wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Christoph Egger wrote:
>> This problem is known. See PR 32816.
>> Workaround: move or rename /stand/amd64/5.99.03 to something else,
>> so that no modules can be found.
> In this case, making the modules "not found" wouldn't work, since there
> are no filesystems or anything else in the kernel itself; everything
> _is_ a module. Without the ffs module I wouldn't even get my root
> partition mounted. :)
The amd64 kernel configs in the repository haven't been stripped down
yet likewise to the i386 ones for exactly this reason.
If you compile an amd64 GENERIC kernel, you still have everything
>> Paul Goyette wrote:
>>> I've built a amd64 kernel without any file systems or compat code in the
>>> kernel itself; all of those options lines are commented out in the
>>> config file.
>>> I've installed the new kernel and the 5.99.03/modules and the new /boot
>>> (from /usr/mdec/boot).
>>> Shortly after booting, while the various /etc/rc.d/ stuff is still going
>>> on, the system panics. Unfortunately, it seems to happen just as soon
>>> as xdm takes over the console/display.
>>> So, I rebooted in single-user mode, and of course I needed to run fsck
>>> on my root partition. During the fsck, I got the following panic:
>>> panic: kernel diagnostic assertion "end <= VM_MAX_KERNEL_ADDRESS"
>>> failed: file "/build/netbsd-local/src/sys/uvm/uvm_km.c", line 473
>>> fatal breakpoint trap in supervisor mode
>>> trap type 1 code 0 rip ffffffff80151565 cs 8 rflags 246 cr2 f0cbc9 cpl 0
>>> rsp ffff80004bedaa90
>>> Stopped in pid 0.8 (system) at netbsd:breakpoint+0x5: leave
>>> A backtrace produces
>>> The config file and dmesg output (from equivalent 5.99.02 boot) are
Main Index |
Thread Index |