Tiny Core Linux
General TC => Tiny Core on Virtual Machines => Topic started by: David_Dai on November 07, 2010, 04:37:25 AM
-
TC 3.1
TC 2.6.32.2
they Can'd run in Virual PC!!!
I posted some screen message now :
Code: c0 d4 54 c0 64 8b 15 60 99 54 c0 f6 44 02 27 02 74 0b 89 e0 25 00 e0 ff f
0f ae 78 08 89 e0 31 c9 25 00 e0 ff ff 89 ca 83 c0 08 <0f> 01 c8 0f ae f0 89 f
e8 12 f9 ff ff 85 c0 75 09 31 c9 89 c8
EIP: [<c0108a57>] SS:ESP 0068:c0499fe0
---[ end trace 57611727ea75c4a7 ]---
Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
Pid: 0, comm: swapper Tainted: G D 2.6.33.3-tinycore #2012
Call Trace:
[<c0128316>] ? 0xc0128316
[<c012ab85>] ? 0xc012ab85
[<c01294e3>] ? 0xc01294e3
[<c01035c7>] ? 0xc01035c7
[<c0105068>] ? 0xc0105068
[<c0103633>] ? 0xc0103633
[<c0108a57>] ? 0xc0108a57
[<c0107527>] ? 0xc0107527
[<c013b4d7>] ? 0xc013b4d7
[<c0106b96>] ? 0xc0106b96
[<c03bd306>] ? 0xc03bd306
[<c01035c7>] ? 0xc01035c7
[<c0108a57>] ? 0xc0108a57
[<c01017e9>] ? 0xc01017e9
[<c04e97de>] ? 0xc04e97de
no cont in shutdown!
-
That would be a kernel panic. I believe there may be other posts (try a search), but if I recall, one workaround would be to switch around the NIC.
-
David_Dai: Am I correct to assume that the kernel panic you have shown did happen at the shutdown of TC? I'm using a lot of VMs (mostly QEMU and VBox) and on very few occasions I've seen a kernel panic at shutdown time (not limited to TC but IIRC also with Ubuntu, or Fedora).
I'm not too worried if that happens once in a while. In particular with TC I don't see an issue if it happens after the backup and syncing of all attached disks. Nevertheless it would be important to know whether you've observed the kernel panic once, or is it occuring frequently? With what sort of configuration in terms of devices (i.e. CD-ROM, disks, etc)? What are the activities leading up to that event?
Furthermore I rarely use the Microsoft product "Virtual PC" (i.e. v6.0.210.0 in my case) with Linux systems. This product (for obvious reasons) does not (and probably will never) "officially" support any Linux system. For starters (at least in my own findings) the mouse is a bit of an issue, plus there was no performance advantange when compared to VBox or QEMU (with KQEMU). OTOH those alternatives work very well with Linux guests, so I don't see a reason to find possible ways to resolve or identify work-arrounds for the deficiencies of "Virtual PC".
-
Furthermore I rarely use the Microsoft product "Virtual PC" (i.e. v6.0.210.0 in my case) with Linux systems. This product (for obvious reasons) does not (and probably will never) "officially" support any Linux system.
I would not place my bets on that after Microsoft submitted Hyper-V drivers to the (Linux) kernel, which improve the performance of virtual Linux guest systems in a Windows hosted environment.
-
I would not place my bets on that after Microsoft submitted Hyper-V drivers to the (Linux) kernel, which improve the performance of virtual Linux guest systems in a Windows hosted environment.
Me thinks those are vastly different products: One (e.g. "Virtual PC 2007") is for consumers to run older versions of Windows in a VM on a newer version of Windows, the other is to entice data centers to run Hyper-V because without Linux support that product would be laughed at by many of the intended users. Clearly the former crowd should better not know how good Linux can be, whilst the latter is already wiser.
-
@tinypoodle: Do you mean the Hyper-V drivers that nearly were deleted from the kernel a couple versions later, because nobody maintained them?
-
Oh, they were? I must have missed a few episodes then :P
(guessing the removal might have happened with less noise than the submission...)