From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:52:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:52:46 -0500 Received: from ivy.tec.in.us ([168.91.1.1]:13702 "EHLO otter.ivy.tec.in.us") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:52:38 -0500 Message-ID: <4687.168.91.2.45.1005835548.squirrel@mail.ivy.tec.in.us> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:45:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: 2.4.14 reboot on/before boot From: "John Madden" To: In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: Cc: X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.0 [rc2]) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Two machines, identical hardware (Dell 2450's, Dual PIII/667, 1gig >> ram). One one, 2.4.14 boots and runs nicely, as one would expect. On >> the other, "as close to exact as I can imagine" compile configs, the >> machine reboots just after LILO's "Loading Linux..." Same version of >> LILO on both as well. >> >> Has anyone else experienced this? Any ideas on a fix? > > Check they are the same BIOS. If so run memtest86 across them. The Lilo > load/unpack might be enough to stress memory and find real faults Checked the BIOS versions and memtested the 'bad' machine, versions match, no bad memory found. I tried upgrading on multiple machines, some others failed, some didn't. So far, two of our 2450's take 2.4.14 without issue and three don't. Working: Dual PIII/667, 1gig, 3x18gb scsi, adaptec 7xxx Dual PIII/1000, 1gig, 4x18gb scsi, ami megaraid Not working: Single PIII/667, 256mb, 2x18gb scsi, adaptec 7xxx 2 x (Dual PIII/667, 1gig, 3x18gb scsi, adaptec 7xxx) All 5 machines have the same BIOS and 'backplane' rev. In the 'not working' machines, all three do exactly the same thing: LILO -> "Loading Linux.." (or something similar, text that flashes very quickly) -> reboot. All of these boxes have and are running 2.2.19 without so much as a single crash (or any other issue, for that matter) since upgrading from 2.2.16. I can swallow one machine having a fluky RAM issue, but not three. I'm strongly considering dropping back to 2.2.20... Thanks, John -- John Madden UNIX Systems Engineer Ivy Tech State College jmadden@ivy.tec.in.us