CentOS - Feb 2007 - Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver -Correction

1) I'm actually not building a custom kernel per se, just one from the
standard 2.6.11.4 with our configuration.  I may be adding a custom
driver, but unless I can get the standard kernel to boot,...

2) I have been told that after 2.6.11.4, support for the Infiniband
driver is dropped, and we need that.  If this is not the case, I would
be delighted to know that and proceed accordingly.  I'm not sure, but I
believe that CentOS version 5 will not happen soon enough for what we
need.

Thanks.

mhr

-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Perrin
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:04 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver
-Correction

On 2/6/07, Mark Hull-Richter <mhull-richter at datallegro.com>
wrote:
> Any other/further input?
Yes, though not directly related to your issue.

1. Why build a custom kernel instead of sticking with the distro
provided one?
2. If you feel that you absolutely have to build a custom kernel, why
build such an old one?

-- 
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act.
George Orwell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS at centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Wednesday 07 February 2007 03:21, Mark Hull-Richter
wrote:
> 1) I'm actually not building a custom kernel per se, just one from the
> standard 2.6.11.4 with our configuration.  I may be adding a custom
> driver, but unless I can get the standard kernel to boot,...
Custom is defined as not-a-centos-one.
> 2) I have been told that after 2.6.11.4, support for the Infiniband
> driver is dropped, and we need that.
Both Centos-4.3 and 4.4 (2.6.9-34.xx and -42.xx) has comparable or newer 
infiniband drivers though I recommend that you download and install ofed-1.1 
(and that you use latest 4.4, 2.6.9-42.0.8).

If you do feel the need to use a kernel.org kernel then I _really_ recommend 
using a newer one than what you tried. 1) do you think the first ever 
infiniband drop for the mainline kernel is what you want? 2) how many 
security problems do you think there are in that old kernel? (hint: quite a 
few). So go with 2.6.19.x for x as large as you can find.

/Peter
> If this is not the case, I would 
> be delighted to know that and proceed accordingly.  I'm not sure, but I
> believe that CentOS version 5 will not happen soon enough for what we
> need.
>
> Thanks.
>
> mhr
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070207/f18264ee/attachment.sig>

None of that worked.  When I edited out the HWADDR lines, I got this
instead:

Feb  7 06:36:34 sparenode1 network: Setting network parameters:
succeeded
Feb  7 06:36:34 sparenode1 network: Bringing up loopback interface:
succeeded
Feb  7 06:36:34 sparenode1 ifup: e1000 device eth0 does not seem to be
present, delaying initialization.
Feb  7 06:36:34 sparenode1 network: Bringing up interface eth0:  failed
Feb  7 06:36:34 sparenode1 ifup: e1000 device eth1 does not seem to be
present, delaying initialization.
Feb  7 06:36:34 sparenode1 network: Bringing up interface eth1:  failed

Hwconf did not change significantly when I ran kudzu, so I have no idea
what's going on here.

Again, this works exactly as is on 32-bit builds.  It only fails on the
64 bit build.

-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On
Behalf Of Radu Radutiu
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:47 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver
-Correction

Editing out HWADDR should fix your problem. Another possible solution
is to check that the value in the HWADDR line in
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-ethX  is the same as listed in
the /etc/sysconfig/hwconf for the corresponding network interface.
Also make sure that the files
/etc/sysconfig/networking/devices/ifcfg-ethX and
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 are hard links to the same
file.
You can regenerate the content of the /etc/sysconfig/hwconf by
removing it and running kudzu again.

I hear you, and this would not be my best choice either.

New issue coming shortly, with the 42.0.8 distribution rpm....

Thanks, all!

mhr

-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Perrin
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 4:27 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver
-Correction
> Again, this works exactly as is on 32-bit builds.  It only fails on
the
> 64 bit build.
Is this a completely clean x86_64 box you're building on? Any i386
packages on it? You could very likely be getting cross-chatter across
library arch versions if not.

<soap box>This is one of the reasons I recommend against doing stuff
like this. You introduce loads more variables into your sys-admin time
vs duties vs system stability matrix. In addition, if you build fresh
on every new box, you can end up with sporadic and unreproducible
problems due to subtle differences.
</soap box>

-- 
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act.
George Orwell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS at centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

We're looking at 2.6.16 or higher now, and also 2.6.9-42.0.8 (CentOS 4.4
updated) - thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On
Behalf Of Peter Kjellstrom
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 11:02 PM
To: centos at centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver
-Correction

On Wednesday 07 February 2007 03:21, Mark Hull-Richter
wrote:
> 1) I'm actually not building a custom kernel per se, just one from the
> standard 2.6.11.4 with our configuration.  I may be adding a custom
> driver, but unless I can get the standard kernel to boot,...
Custom is defined as not-a-centos-one.
> 2) I have been told that after 2.6.11.4, support for the Infiniband
> driver is dropped, and we need that.
Both Centos-4.3 and 4.4 (2.6.9-34.xx and -42.xx) has comparable or newer

infiniband drivers though I recommend that you download and install
ofed-1.1 
(and that you use latest 4.4, 2.6.9-42.0.8).

If you do feel the need to use a kernel.org kernel then I _really_
recommend 
using a newer one than what you tried. 1) do you think the first ever 
infiniband drop for the mainline kernel is what you want? 2) how many 
security problems do you think there are in that old kernel? (hint:
quite a 
few). So go with 2.6.19.x for x as large as you can find.

/Peter
> If this is not the case, I would 
> be delighted to know that and proceed accordingly.  I'm not sure, but
I
> believe that CentOS version 5 will not happen soon enough for what we
> need.
>
> Thanks.
>
> mhr