Tiny Core Linux

Tiny Core Base => TCB Bugs => Topic started by: devzero on March 11, 2012, 11:25:59 AM

Title: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: devzero on March 11, 2012, 11:25:59 AM

hi,
i had a hard time yesterday getting tinycore 4.x work on Neoware BA-EON4300S x86 thin-clients.

read post at
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cpufreq/7986

Until that problem is resolved upstream i would recommend that this module is being blacklisted in Tinycore, as there are still lots of Neoware ora VÍA C3/nehemiah "out in the wild".

regards
roland

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: curaga on March 11, 2012, 01:09:34 PM

We can't selectively blacklist, and I assume it is still useful for later Via cpus.

Noting here too that the fix was "longhaul.disable=1", disabling the module.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: b1ackmai1er on March 13, 2012, 08:20:46 AM

I don't think this is limited to TC4X.

I have a VIA C3 nehemiah cpu on my media server motherboard running TC3 and this module also causes my machine to hang.

Regards B1ackmai1er

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: Rich on March 13, 2012, 09:33:31 AM

Having certain modules blacklisted by default is a door you not want to open, because once you do,
where do you draw the line? It starts with module A. Then you add B, and C, and D, ......  Next thing
you know, members start posting that they want or need module C, which is now blacklisted by
default. One of Tinycores features is to be bootable out of the box with little to no effort by the majority
of users. Should an included module ever start causing problems for the majority of users, I suspect
that rather than be blacklisted by default, it would be moved to a tcz as an optional module.
Blacklisting is the responsibility of the end user, as it should be.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: devzero on March 13, 2012, 06:53:58 PM

but why does TC3 work without problems? I assume the module isn`t being loaded there by default, so the question is what makes it load by default on TC4.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: gerald_clark on March 13, 2012, 07:24:02 PM

It is a different kernel.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: bmarkus on March 13, 2012, 07:27:42 PM

cpufreq kernel moduls are not included in TC 3.x base and optionals via .tct while TC 4.x base comes with these modules including longhaul.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: devzero on March 13, 2012, 08:20:42 PM

if tinycore means "Tiny Core", why is  addon-stuff included, which keeps users from running it?

Ok, just kidding;)

But AFAIK,Tinycore is often running on small and especially old machines and at least i have seen lot`s of reports of issues with longhaul module, so i`m curious if it adds real benefit or keeps users from using tinycore. The problem is: if tinycore does not work because of such module, it`s difficult to find out the reason and it maybe even more difficult to fix it, because there is no easy way to "adjust" the base system. (i.e. remove the module etc)

regards
roland


http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-hardware-18/computer-randomly-freezes-417583/
http://www.viaarena.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-22941.html
http://en.opensuse.org/SDB:VIA
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/398552
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1235701
http://forum.ubuntuusers.de/topic/was-tun-gegen-staendiges-einfrieren-via-epia/#post-171040
http://osdir.com/ml/linux.kernel.cpufreq/2004-12/msg00069.html
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0603.0/1146.html
http://www.linux-club.de/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=52079

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: bmarkus on March 14, 2012, 03:21:03 AM

I do not know whether the longhaul modul is broken or the chipset is buggy. To have CPU frequency scaling by default activated is a good idea. However it is not essential to have. One possible solution to remove just longhaul from base and move it to a .tcz.

Is the situation the same with 4.4rc? If so, better to mention your issue at
Better to menti

http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,12786.0.html

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: b1ackmai1er on March 16, 2012, 08:07:31 AM

Hi,

How can I disable this module when booting from the CD?

I cannot complete USB install because the machine locks before the install process completes.

Thanks.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: Rich on March 16, 2012, 09:07:05 AM

Hi b1ackmai1er
Did you try the boot code suggested by curaga in reply #1?

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: b1ackmai1er on March 16, 2012, 09:16:34 AM

yes, thanks.

I typed longhaul.disable=1 at the command line but it did not work but it looks like I need to type "tc longhaul.disable=1" at the boot command line. Thanks.

Now I want to set up my system to usb boot using tc-install. It has the option to enter command line options as well. Do I use the same  "tc longhaul.disable=1" at this prompt? or do i skip the tc or do I need to use blacklist longhaul?

Thanks

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: Rich on March 16, 2012, 09:20:12 AM

Hi b1ackmai1er
Skip the tc, it is only used when manually adding something at the boot prompt.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: b1ackmai1er on March 17, 2012, 08:15:44 AM

Thanks Rich that worked for me.

Title: Re: longhaul kernel module breaks tinycore 4.x on neoware via c3 platform
Post by: devzero on June 16, 2012, 06:50:25 PM

http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,13467.msg74601.html#msg74601