Bug 42716
Summary: | Boot failure with KMS enabled (radeon) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Drivers | Reporter: | Robby Workman (rw) |
Component: | Video(DRI - non Intel) | Assignee: | drivers_video-dri |
Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | paulepanter |
Priority: | P1 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Kernel Version: | 3.2.x | Subsystem: | |
Regression: | No | Bisected commit-id: |
Description
Robby Workman
2012-02-02 03:11:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #0) > Any idea what's going on here? Given your mixed testing results, I suspect the bisect result is bogus; you probably need to at least test each kernel a couple of times before declaring it as good. > I don't have the option to attach a serial console, for what that's > worth, so that aside, any suggestions for further debugging? You could try netconsole. I'm marking this as invalid. The machine I was seeing this on has died, and it started with all of the usb ports going bad. From there, other parts stopped working over the course of several days. I suspect a bad motherboard that was introducing faults, and 3.1.x was somehow working around them better than 3.2.x. Who knows? :/ (In reply to comment #0) […] > Any idea what's going on here? I don't have the option to attach a serial > console, for what that's worth, so that aside, any suggestions for further > debugging? Next time you can try netconsole. Although it has to be loaded before the radeon module. I guess a way to come around that issue is to build the module for the network card into the Linux kernel. Additionally you could have started using a standard driver like vesafb(?) and then load the radeon module manually after the system booted. Thanks and good luck with your new system. [1] http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/netconsole.txt (In reply to comment #2) > I'm marking this as invalid. The machine I was seeing this on has died, and > it > started with all of the usb ports going bad. From there, other parts stopped > working over the course of several days. I suspect a bad motherboard that > was > introducing faults, and 3.1.x was somehow working around them better than > 3.2.x. Who knows? :/ Could you please document what machine and what board this was? In case others experience problems with the same machine it is quite helpful to know of quality issues. |