On 04/26/2011 08:43 AM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:

centos-bounces@centos.org wrote:

...

Hello,

Anybody know the reason RedHat decided not to support the VIA Eden Processor?

Possibly ... Does that processor have PAE? The non-PAE kernel was dropped, the current 'normal' kernel requires a PAE-capable processor.

...

UNSUPPORTED HARDWARE DEVICE: Centaur Processor ------------[ cut here ]------------

Appears to: cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : CentaurHauls cpu family : 6 model : 13 model name : VIA Eden Processor 500MHz stepping : 0 cpu MHz : 498.788 cache size : 128 KB fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge cmov pat clflush acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 tm nx up pni est tm2 xtpr rng rng_en ace ace_en a ce2 ace2_en phe phe_en pmm pmm_en bogomips : 997.57 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 32 bits virtual power management:

On 04/26/2011 09:55 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 04/26/2011 07:48 AM, Steve Clark wrote:

...

On 04/26/2011 08:43 AM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:

...

centos-bounces@centos.org wrote:

...

Hello,

Anybody know the reason RedHat decided not to support the VIA Eden Processor?

Possibly ... Does that processor have PAE? The non-PAE kernel was dropped, the current 'normal' kernel requires a PAE-capable processor.

...

UNSUPPORTED HARDWARE DEVICE: Centaur Processor ------------[ cut here ]------------

Appears to: cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : CentaurHauls cpu family : 6 model : 13 model name : VIA Eden Processor 500MHz stepping : 0 cpu MHz : 498.788 cache size : 128 KB fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge cmov pat clflush acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 tm nx up pni est tm2 xtpr rng rng_en ace ace_en a ce2 ace2_en phe phe_en pmm pmm_en bogomips : 997.57 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 32 bits virtual power management:

My understanding is that this CPU is not even completely i686 compatible ... does CentOS-5 even work with that?

I thought that VIA Eden required i586 kernel and i386 or i586 glibc ...

(this may be a newer version than the one I tested 4-5 years ago)

It has been running 5.x just fine. It also runs the ayplus kernel fine too:

uname -a Linux 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.centos.ayplus.1.i686 #1 SMP Fri Apr 8 17:23:21 PDT 2011 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux

cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : CentaurHauls cpu family : 6 model : 13 model name : VIA Eden Processor 500MHz stepping : 0 cpu MHz : 498.783 cache size : 128 KB fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge cmov pat clflush acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 tm nx up pni est tm2 xtpr rng rng_en ace ace_en a ce2 ace2_en phe phe_en pmm pmm_en bogomips : 997.56 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 32 bits virtual power management:

centos-bounces@centos.org wrote:

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Steve Clark sclark@netwolves.com wrote:

...

Anybody know the reason RedHat decided not to support the VIA Eden Processor?

(snip)

...

I traced it down to this code, which is not in the standard kernel.org kernel-2.6.32.36: from kernel-2.6.32.36 static void __cpuinit early_init_centaur(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) {     switch (c->x86) {

from 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.ayplus arch/x86/kernel/cpu/centaur.c

static void __cpuinit early_init_centaur(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) {         mark_hardware_unsupported("Centaur Processor");   <<<<<<<<<<         switch (c->x86) {

Chances are you will not get a definitive answer from the CentOS people. So, you'd need to ask those who actually added the code. Question is whether this was done by Fedora or by RHEL devs.

Akemi <<<<<===== note: CentOS person.

Can you not that line and re-compile the kernel? CentOS puts out a centosplus kernel based on the original plus good ideas. If that line of code is not central to preventing kernel panics, nop it out and run with it. Tell the CeontOSPlus people whether it works.

//me <<<<<=== Note: NOT a CentOS person.

Insert spiffy .sig here: Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary parts.

//me ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.Hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated**

If I had to guess, it would be that the OS is considered an "enterprise" OS, and that the CPU is too low end, now, to be considered that. It is kind of low end now for even personal use.

Not that people only use the OS for high end server hardware :)

At work, we still have to support 500MHz Pentium IIIs with 128MB of RAM. Hopefully that requirement will be dropped before we migrate to 6. We had to make kernel modifications to even get the PCMCIA support to work on it.

If you take a look on google for "CentaurHauls i686" you will see that this CPU/chipset SAYS it fully supports i686 but it really does not. All of EL6 is i686 and not i586 (which CentaurHauls really fully supports).

I think you are going to have issues with this CPU and EL6 forever. EL5.x should likely be used with this CPU ...

It is hoped (by a few posters on this list) that the 6.x centosplus kernel will be 586-aware and 586-compatible.

Insert spiffy .sig here: Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary parts.

//me ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.Hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated**

On 05/11/2011 05:46 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 05/10/2011 05:42 AM, Steve Clark wrote:

...

On 04/26/2011 08:24 AM, Steve Clark wrote:

...

Hello,

Anybody know the reason RedHat decided not to support the VIA Eden Processor?

cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : CentaurHauls cpu family : 6 model : 13 model name : VIA Eden Processor 500MHz

I am testing, (using ayplus kernel) and get the following during bootup: Linux version 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.centos.ayplus.1.i686 (build@6beta32) (gcc versi on 4.4.4 20100630 (Red Hat 4.4.4-10) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Fri Apr 8 17:23:21 PDT 2011 KERNEL supported cpus: Intel GenuineIntel AMD AuthenticAMD NSC Geode by NSC Cyrix CyrixInstead Centaur CentaurHauls Transmeta GenuineTMx86 Transmeta TransmetaCPU UMC UMC UMC UMC UNSUPPORTED HARDWARE DEVICE: Centaur Processor ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: at kernel/unsupported.c:13 mark_hardware_unsupported+0x37/0x40() (Not t ainted) Your hardware is unsupported. Please do not report bugs, panics, oopses, etc., on this hardware. Modules linked in: Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.centos.ayplus.1.i686 #1 Call Trace: [<c0450201>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x81/0xc0 [<c0477e67>] ? mark_hardware_unsupported+0x37/0x40 [<c0477e67>] ? mark_hardware_unsupported+0x37/0x40 [<c0450293>] ? warn_slowpath_fmt_taint+0x33/0x40 [<c0477e67>] ? mark_hardware_unsupported+0x37/0x40 [<c08056eb>] ? early_init_centaur+0xd/0x2d [<c0a49835>] ? early_cpu_init+0x11a/0x13e [<c0a453b3>] ? setup_arch+0x38/0xb90 [<c0450d3e>] ? vprintk+0x1ae/0x490 [<c080ba2a>] ? printk+0x17/0x1d [<c0a5a4ee>] ? cgroup_init_subsys+0xcf/0xdb [<c0a406da>] ? start_kernel+0xca/0x3a4 ---[ end trace a7919e7f17c0a725 ]--- Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint

I traced it down to this code, which is not in the standard kernel.org kernel-2.6.32.36: from kernel-2.6.32.36 static void __cpuinit early_init_centaur(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) { switch (c->x86) {

from 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.ayplus arch/x86/kernel/cpu/centaur.c

static void __cpuinit early_init_centaur(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) { mark_hardware_unsupported("Centaur Processor");<<<<<<<<<< switch (c->x86) {

Thanks,

FYI. Replying to my own E-Mail after running 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6 from SL. I can report that I have been having lockups (hangs) on three different via centaur processor boxes. The hangs require power cycling the boxes.

If you take a look on google for "CentaurHauls i686" you will see that this CPU/chipset SAYS it fully supports i686 but it really does not. All of EL6 is i686 and not i586 (which CentaurHauls really fully supports).

I think you are going to have issues with this CPU and EL6 forever. EL5.x should likely be used with this CPU ...

Hello,

does anyone have updates to this page for 6.0. I would like to try to build a 2.6.32.xx kernel.org kernel and see if I still gets hangs on my CentuarHauls boxes.

http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Custom_Kernel

On 05/11/2011 08:49 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:

Steve Clark wrote:

...

Hello,

does anyone have updates to this page for 6.0. I would like to try to build a 2.6.32.xx kernel.org kernel and see if I still gets hangs on my CentuarHauls boxes.

http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Custom_Kernel

check out the elrepo-kernel repo: http://elrepo.org/tiki/kernel-ml

Thanks,

I had looked there before and there we no kernels for 6.0.

Just checking now and still don't see any. Am I missing something?

Hello Steve,

On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 09:10 -0400, Steve Clark wrote:

On 05/11/2011 08:49 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: I had looked there before and there we no kernels for 6.0.

Just checking now and still don't see any. Am I missing something?

The fact that 6.0 hasn't been released yet ;p

Regards, Leonard.

On 11/05/11 19:01, Les Mikesell wrote:

On 5/11/2011 12:32 PM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:

...

Hello Steve,

On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 09:10 -0400, Steve Clark wrote:

...

On 05/11/2011 08:49 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: I had looked there before and there we no kernels for 6.0.

Just checking now and still don't see any. Am I missing something?

The fact that 6.0 hasn't been released yet ;p

There is some stuff in http://elrepo.org/linux/testing/el6/, but no complete kernels. Has the change in the way RH releases kernel source made it too difficult to manage modifications?

ELRepo has plenty of packages available for RHEL6. We (elrepo) worked closely with upstream during the beta of 6 to ensure we had a process that was ready to go as soon as 6 was released.

At this point we have chosen not to do a mainline kernel for RHEL6. This has absolutely nothing to do with the way the RHEL6 kernel sources are packaged. The elrepo kernel-ml is a packaged mainline kernel (from kernel.org) and has nothing to do with the RHEL kernel. It has far more to do with the fact the distro kernel in 6 is a lot newer and thus there is currently less need for a packaged mainline kernel. We (Alan) already maintains 2 mainline kernels packaged for RHEL5 (the 2.6.35 long term support and 2.6.38 latest stable) and that represents a significant amount of work for one person, in addition to everything else he does. Adding another one or two kernel series for 6 is not a task to undertake lightly.

On 05/11/2011 04:01 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:

Leonard den Ottolander wrote:

...

Hello Steve,

On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 09:10 -0400, Steve Clark wrote:

...

On 05/11/2011 08:49 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: I had looked there before and there we no kernels for 6.0.

Just checking now and still don't see any. Am I missing something?

The fact that 6.0 hasn't been released yet ;p

Regards, Leonard.

This showed up in RSS Feed:

Centosplus kernels for C6 are available for testing from:

http://centos.toracat.org/kernel/centos6/centosplus-testing/

The latest is kernel-2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.centos.ayplus. If you wish to know all the details about the centosplus kernel, go to:

Thanks, but I am already using that kernel. I want to get a vanilla kernel.org 2.6.32.xx kernel running on 6.0.

In fact following AY directions I was able to rebuild the srpms for kernel-2.6.32-71.29.2, but again that is not the generic kernel form kernel.org.