[parisc-linux] palo-1.4 broken on 32bit ?

[James Bottomley]

On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 14:36, Helge Deller wrote:
> after apt-get upgrading to palo_1.4_hppa.deb it seems, that palo-1.4 isn't able any longer to boot up a 32bit Linux kernel on a 32bit Machine.
> I've run several tests on a B180L, and only after downgrading to palo-1.3 I was able to boot again.
> 
> Am I the only one seeing this problem ? 
> Anyone maybe has an idea what has been changed ?

Well, it works just fine for me:

redscar:~# palo -v
palo version 1.4 bame at c3k Fri Mar 26 16:18:35 MST 2004
ELF32 executable
Partition Start(MB) End(MB) Id Type
1               1     257   82 swap
2             258     277   f0 Palo
3             278    2045   83 ext2
4            2046    4094   83 ext2
F0 partition start sector 527744 length 41230
do_ra(1, 5, 3, -1, '3/boot/vmlinux initrd=3/boot/initrd.img
root=/dev/sda3 HOME=/ console=ttyS0 console=tty0', 4, -1, 270204928,
21109760)
check_bootloader 213
checksum(0x2f2b0, 36864) = 0x00000000
ipl: addr 270204928 size 36864 entry 0x0
 ko 0x0 ksz 0 k64o 0x0 k64sz 0 rdo 0 rdsz 0
<3/boot/vmlinux initrd=3/boot/initrd.img root=/dev/sda3 HOME=/
console=ttyS0 console=tty0>
check_bootloader 650
checksum(0x262a8, 36864) = 0x00000000
ipl: addr 270204928 size 36864 entry 0x0
 ko 0x101f0000 ksz 3421952 k64o 0x0 k64sz 0 rdo 0 rdsz 0
<3/boot/vmlinux initrd=3/boot/initrd.img root=/dev/sda3 HOME=/
console=ttyS0 console=tty0>
redscar:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo 
processor       : 0
cpu family      : PA-RISC 1.1e
cpu             : PA7300LC (PCX-L2)
cpu MHz         : 180.000000
model           : 9000/778/B180L
model name      : Merlin L2+ 180 (9000/778/B180L)
hversion        : 0x00005040
sversion        : 0x00000481
I-cache         : 64 KB
D-cache         : 64 KB (WB)
ITLB entries    : 96
DTLB entries    : 96 - shared with ITLB
BTLB fixed      : max. 16384 pages, pagesize=4096 (64MB)
BTLB fix-entr.  : 0 instruction, 0 data (8 combined)
BTLB var-entr.  : 0 instruction, 0 data (0 combined)
bogomips        : 119.60
software id     : 2012752031

However, there have been several reports of intermittent failures with
later versions of palo; if you could actually track the issue down, that
would be greatly appreciated.

The current thought is that it's a command line issue (i.e. embedding a
commmand line >128 characters in palo causes failures).

James