Best Keeps Getting Bigger
in [Debian]
|
From: Stephen Powell on 29 Dec 2009 11:20 On 2009-12-29 at15:47:41 +0200, David Baron wrote: > Built kernel 2.6.32.3. Get 2.6.32EBDA too big, overlaps lilo 2nd stage image > or something like that. This is a non-initrd kernel. > > Do I have to go back to an initrd (stopped using it because of all those yaird > problems)? > > Or is there a lilo parameter I can increase to make room? David, First of all, according to some posts I have seen elsewhere, "EBDA too big" messages often result when the kernel is updated but lilo is not run. First try to boot your system from the old kernel (or a rescue CD, if need be) and re-run lilo manually, just in case the install script for your new kernel didn't run it. That may do the trick. Secondly, there is a lilo option called "large-memory" that may help. By default, lilo assumes that both the kernel and the initial RAM disk must load below the 15M line. The "large-memory" option may allow the kernel to load above the 16M line. I know it works for the initial RAM disk. I'm not sure if it works for the kernel itself. The option is not enabled by default because older BIOSes don't support it. If your BIOS date is 2001 or newer, it will probably work. Also, lilo itself must be new enough to support the "large-memory" option. The man page for lilo.conf should tell you that. See if the option is documented there. If all the conditions for support are there, add the "large-memory" option to /etc/lilo.conf and rerun lilo (as root, of course). Then try to boot your new kernel again. Regards, Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: David Baron on 29 Dec 2009 12:00 On Tuesday 29 December 2009 18:12:37 debian-user-digest- request(a)lists.debian.org wrote: > > Built kernel 2.6.32.3. Get 2.6.32EBDA too big, overlaps lilo 2nd stage > > image or something like that. This is a non-initrd kernel. > > > > Do I have to go back to an initrd (stopped using it because of all those > > yaird problems)? > > > > Or is there a lilo parameter I can increase to make room? > > Hi David, > > Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I also > use lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not run > into any boot problems yet. > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt- davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1- davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32- davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-) The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: Dave Witbrodt on 29 Dec 2009 12:20 >> Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I also >> use lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not run >> into any boot problems yet. >> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- > davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- > davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt- > davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1- > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32- > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-) > The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller. You were not asked for the size of the DEB files, but for the size of the kernel binary image. Like so: $ ls -lA /boot/vmlinuz* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2340800 Dec 18 23:34 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2992976 Dec 20 10:44 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32.2-0git091220+k10temp+f71889fg.desktop.uvesafb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3232736 Dec 22 21:12 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32.2-0git+k10temp+f71889fg+r600fix.091222.desktop.kms Note that most of the space suggested by the size of your DEB files is taken up in the initrd images and in the modules directories: $ ls -lA /boot/init* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7424984 Dec 26 17:14 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7427240 Dec 26 17:09 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32.bak $ du -s /lib/modules/2.6.32* 91452 /lib/modules/2.6.32 3948 /lib/modules/2.6.32.2-0git091220+k10temp+f71889fg.desktop.uvesafb 2708 /lib/modules/2.6.32.2-0git+k10temp+f71889fg+r600fix.091222.desktop.kms HTH, Dave W. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: David Baron on 29 Dec 2009 13:00 On Tuesday 29 December 2009 19:14:39 Dave Witbrodt wrote: > >> Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I > >> also use lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not > >> run into any boot problems yet. > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- > > davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- > > davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 > > /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt- > > davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 > > /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1- davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32- > > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > > > The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-) > > The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller. > > You were not asked for the size of the DEB files, but for the size of > the kernel binary image. Like so: Same progression. -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1939120 Nov 16 22:10 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-davidb- svn14611 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1956720 Oct 28 19:26 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-rt-davidb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1992432 Dec 8 22:27 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-davidb These ALL boot. The 2.6.32 above is 2.6.32.1 Reinstalling the 2.6.32.3 deb gives me: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1992752 Dec 28 19:38 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-davidb A relatively small increase but increase never-the-less. Enough to tip it over. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: Stan Hoeppner on 29 Dec 2009 13:00
David Baron put forth on 12/29/2009 10:35 AM: > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- > davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31- > davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt- > davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1- > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32- > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb > > The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-) > The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller. 12.2 MB vs 12.5 MB? "much much smaller"? Why do you consider 300 KB to be "much much smaller"? My kernel.deb is 1.5 MB and my vmlinuz is 1.2 MB. _That_ is "much much smaller". ;) I've only done custom kernels on 32bit x86 headless server platforms, so maybe mine would double in size if I were doing X86-84 kernels due to 8 byte instruction words vs 4 byte words, and triple in size if I was doing desktops/laptops. Still, my kernel would only be 3-4.5 MB. How is yours in the 13MB range? Kitchen sink in there too? ;) -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org |