Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:08:40 +0700 From: Eugene Grosbein <egrosbein@rdtc.ru> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru>, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_8 kernel as of Apr 14 does not boot Message-ID: <4F8D6B58.7010902@rdtc.ru> In-Reply-To: <201204170840.37631.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20120416042645.GA53074@regency.nsu.ru> <20120416070646.GA78414@regency.nsu.ru> <4F8BD14D.8050206@rdtc.ru> <201204170840.37631.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Monday, April 16, 2012 3:59:09 am Eugene Grosbein wrote: >>>>> Just update my 8.x kernel sources last weekend, and newly built kernel did >>>>> not boot for me: >>>>> >>>>> link_elf: symbol mem_range_softc undefined >>>>> KLD file acpi.ko - could not finalize loading >>>>> kernel trap 12 with interrupts disabled >>>> >>>> Try to add 'device mem' to your kernel configuration. >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> I explicitly have "nodevice mem" and "nodevice io" in my config. They are >>> being loaded from /boot/loader.conf. This worked fine for quite a while. >>> >>> I will try to have it compiled-in, but would still prefer it fixed, or in >>> case it cannot be fixed and mem.ko cannot be loaded separately from now on, >>> appropriate entry in UPDATING. >> >> It seems John Baldwin brought dependency of acpi.ko on device mem >> 4 days ago to RELENG_8 with MFC: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/acpica/acpi_wakeup.c#rev1.50.2.3 > > Hmm, this has been broken for a long time on HEAD and 9 it seems. However, there > you get compile breakage (as acpi is no longer supported as a module in 9+) if you > try to build a kernel with 'nodevice mem'. > > Hmm, mp_machdep.c also breaks. That is probably true on i386 as well, and has > been true even on 7.x. (That is, you can't use 'nodevice mem' and 'SMP' in the > same kernel.) > > The simplest fix is to just move mem_range_softc out of mem.ko into the base kernel. > > OTOH, what are you trying to gain by putting mem.ko into a module rather than part of > the base kernel? Do you just want no /dev/mem file or are you trying to disable all > of the MTRR support as well? It may be that we need to rethink what goes into mem.ko > and have it only exclude /dev/mem but always leave MTRR support enabled. I guess, Alexey just tries to make smallest possible kernel just for fun :-) Or, for PicoBSD case where kernel should be booted from very small media and modules from another one. Eugene Grosbein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F8D6B58.7010902>