From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 21:09:42 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D385106564A for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:09:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dcornejo@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.238]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A2B8FC0C for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:09:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dcornejo@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id f6so8208066rvb.3 for ; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:09:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=wn6xFmCg/QcYHW2hEJJt75MGHmqkKLQ1VG8q9uj5Ne8=; b=nyUs6tzE/DjY5JYlrjxPok4HIf69tVZwfWbsGdyhoZkCnPZcduylYPnsgssOnf75Aw 0VKQITVeeb6ppdaCm5sE2E1DipDbTGMzJlY26TK4hZODVqNrc5zOWsFTDXDQEiU6hFFb ovQX8Qh/y3v0AH0QXyFgVjnj0sTwAfvjnkSJI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=jzPk7PnbI0HB7z1o6lc98th8nUby7BnT9v80PUQcSE1g8vUYy5dXzaI7XCsg2ndLRr vmxmaCq2qQlAx/lgdm+WtvCu+0+IyQlHQy/d0BaEO8C1BREj2duXKzoMWZhAqGaNETn4 +A64aN2nA+xseNH3BMTHpJK2PpzdIaIrMe6SE= Received: by 10.141.168.2 with SMTP id v2mr11113853rvo.207.1231276181503; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:09:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.48.11 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:09:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6b8e8f4f0901061309h50535c58ue436da56213b70b8@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:09:41 -1000 From: "David Cornejo" To: "Marcel Moolenaar" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <6b8e8f4f0812281128lf48f391r38f063f7f797404@mail.gmail.com> <20081231194741.GA57089@alchemy.franken.de> Cc: marcel@freebsd.org, freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org, Marius Strobl Subject: Re: invalid disk label on updated current ultra60 X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:09:42 -0000 On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > On Dec 31, 2008, at 11:47 AM, Marius Strobl wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 09:28:49AM -1000, David Cornejo wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've got an ultra60 that works fine with a kernel built Nov 22nd and >>> new kernels starting at least a couple of days ago claim that the >>> disklabel on da0 & da1 are invalid and mounting root fails. This is a >>> fairly old system that was probably installed with 6 or 7 and upgraded >>> to 8. I haven't seen this problem on my x86/amd64 machines is there >>> some incantation to make the disklabels valid? >>> >> >> Apparently the problem are labels (originally) generated by >> Solaris, which uses the native geometry reported by the >> target rather than a synthetic one based on 255 heads and >> 63 sectors as demonstrated by the following format(1M) output >> for two identical disks, the first labeled with format(1M) >> and the second with sunlabel(8) (after zeroing the previous >> one): >> 0. c1t0d0 >> /pci@1f,700000/scsi@2/sd@0,0 >> 1. c1t1d0 >> /pci@1f,700000/scsi@2/sd@1,0 >> >> The 63 sectors limit of GEOM_PART_VTOC8 also causes problems >> with IDE disks > 32GB where FreeBSD uses a synthetic geometry >> based on 255 sectors like Solaris does in order to circumvent >> the 16-bit cylinders, heads and sectors fields of the Sun and >> VTOC8 disk labels. I think the upper limits for heads and >> sectors therefore should be just removed from GEOM_PART_VTOC8, >> which should also be safe, i.e. no upper bound needed, as done >> by the below patch in order for their maximum value to be used. >> Marcel, are you okay with this? Do you have a good idea how >> to avoid the warning regarding geometry mismatch for labels >> created by Solaris? > > I'm perfectly happy with it. The limits are mostly PC BIOS > specific, though I kept them under the assumption that 1) > they would hold for sparc64 and 2) we may make assumptions > out the geometry in differenmt parts of the FreeBSD source > base. > > It seems the limits simply don't hold, so it's better to > remove them and deal with problems in other parts of the > source tree if we encounter them. > > As for the warning: I made the geometry mismatch visible > so that we can work the problem. If it's something that > we cannot fix on sparc64 because Solaris uses the native > geometry and we never do (for example), then we should > just get rid of the warning and add a comment instead... > > FYI, > > -- > Marcel Moolenaar > xcllnt@mac.com The committed change solved my problem, many thanks! dave c