On Saturday 11 November 2006 22:52, Jim Cornette wrote: >Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Saturday 11 November 2006 19:42, Craig White wrote: >>> ---- >>> you're detective work notwithstanding, Bill Nottingham's suggestion >>> to put an entry into 'udev' rules was the suggested recommendation >>> for the problem but since you didn't try that with the xen kernel, >>> didn't post your results on this bugzilla entry after trying the >>> recommended entry, I guess none of us will ever be certain. > >Someone with the Xen kernel version should be able to repeat this >without any problem. It sounds like virtual devices are being created >but real devices are not, such as serial ports. > >> And what sort of an entry might that be? It does create 4 devices >> now, as its written to do, but the devices are worthless when the >> onboard hardware hasn't been detected. > >Since xen is a category on the installer if you choose to install >virtualization, many other people have installed the xen kernel and were >caught with real hardware problems. Devices effected on my hearing were >video problems, lockups and now serial communication ports. > >>> I guess I am glad that the non-xen kernel gives you what you wanted >>> after all (the serial port interfaces for your X11). I just assumed >>> that you chose the xen kernel with the intent to run xen >>> virtualization, but I am guessing that your motherboard doesn't >>> support xen which is probably the cause of the problem in the first >>> place. > >Isn't XEN restrained to a file, has no hardware unless setup to use real >hardware? I am not sure about xen and machine capability but I know that >my laptop with sufficient memory would stay railed at full speed and >would not last very long with this condition. Also, on other computers >the system memory is so low that xen would not work properly. >It sounds like the problem that happened to Gene and others is even >thinking that the xen version of the kernel would interfere with the >operation of their computer. The thought of users was probably that they >would try out virtualization at a later date. No user would suspect >problems until they tried to setup virtualization, > >> Either way (I didn't choose it, anaconda did), and I have NDI if this >> biostar mobo supports xen or not, there has been precious little >> discussions about it on the 50+ mailing lists I lurk on. > >I believe memory requirements are 256 MB per domain that you setup. I >cannot recall if it is a requirement for a GUI virtual system or text >based systems. I have not used xen myself. I used vmware before but >believe they are with different goals and regard the hardware > differently. > >>> Now I agree with you that getting rid of the xen kernel solves this >>> problem. I don't agree with you a bit that it wasn't a udev problem >>> because if you again read Comment #5 on the above referenced bugzilla >>> entry, it is obvious that Bill Nottingham believes it is a udev >>> related problem. >> >> I still don't see what, if anything, udev could do about it when the >> hardware has not been detected. Does it have some sort of a magic >> twanger for that case that we common mortals don't know about? I'm >> now looking at that #5 comment, but have no clue because theres no >> preamble describing where to put those commands, which I assume would >> go in /.etc/udev/rules.d/50-udev.rules, but it contains no similar >> rules. Those in the know will I assume know where in that file, but to >> me thats not a usable fix without the whole story. But with some use >> of a figurative shovel to dig a little deeper it seems to indicate it >> should be added into /etc/udev/rules.d/05-udev-early-rules. It would >> be more at home there by far. >> >> Is this correct? > >Don't know but one would think that serial devices like com ports were >recognized and initialized by the common standards for serial ports. > >> There is a second reason I didn't pursue that angle, any attempt to >> modprobe anything 8250 related failed due to undefined labels in the >> module(s). Which brings me back to square one, what can udev do >> about it when the kernel can't find the hardware in the first place? >> Heck, right now, with them running, an lspci -vv doesn't show them. >> Whether they should show I don't recall. I just checked on my >> firewall box, and they don't appear there either, so perhaps I'm using >> the wrong tool. > >When one installs virtualization, the kernel for xen should not be the >default kernel. A normal kernel should also be installed and set to > default. Humm, and anaconda didn't do that... >> Sorry I'm so dense in your opinion. If it will make you feel better, >> I'll plead oldtimers since I had a birthday last month, having made it >> to 72. > >Your age is in close proximity to my parents and both seem to have their >faculties still. Happy belated BD. :-) Thanks. >Jim > >>> Craig > >-- >I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't >prove it. Chuckle -- Cheers, Gene
