Re: USB storage no-boot regression (bisected)

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:35:59PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Like Arjan said, this is because we are initializing faster now, and
> > things are a bit more asynchronous.  Use the root_delay boot option,
> > that's what I use for my USB-based systems, and have not had a problem
> > with that at all.
> 
> Is that solution really scalable to every user with a regression severe 
> enough it prevents them from booting?
> 
> When did regressions become an acceptable tradeoff for speed?

So, we aren't allowed to go faster?

What happens when you buy a new box with more USB host controllers and a
faster processor?  Same problem.

> This system boots just fine under kernel 2.6.27, 2.6.26, 2.6.25, and so 
> on.  Switch the kernel to 2.6.28, and it no longer boots.  A regression 
> cannot get more clear than that.
> 
> Maybe this commit should have been accompanied by one that checks "root=" ?

How would that be accomplished?

The issue is that you were just lucky that your machine worked properly
previously.  My boxes with the same type of setup didn't, so I quickly
realized what the root delay boot option was for.  You need to just do
the same thing here, there's nothing else we can do.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/