Description of problem: Has there been a replacement for zipl? It doesn't seem to work. New devices are not being recognized after a reboot. And deleted devices are not "going away". /proc/dasd/devices - only reflects the original specification of devices. jasmith@lnxerh Ready; cat /etc/zipl.conf [defaultboot] default=linux target=/boot/ [linux] image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-4.EL ramdisk=/boot/initrd-2.4.21-4.EL.img parameters="dasd=201-20F,0191,01B4-01BF root=/dev/dasda1" jasmith@lnxerh Ready; cat /boot/parmfile.1 dasd=201-20F,0191,01B4-01BF root=/dev/dasda1 jasmith@lnxerh Ready; jasmith@lnxerh Ready; cat /proc/dasd/devices 0201(ECKD) at ( 94: 0) is dasda : active at blocksize: 4096, 126000 blocks, 492 MB 0202(ECKD) at ( 94: 4) is dasdb : active at blocksize: 4096, 486000 blocks, 1898 MB 0203(none) at ( 94: 8) is dasdc : unknown 0204(none) at ( 94: 12) is dasdd : unknown 0205(none) at ( 94: 16) is dasde : unknown 0206(none) at ( 94: 20) is dasdf : unknown 0207(none) at ( 94: 24) is dasdg : unknown 0208(none) at ( 94: 28) is dasdh : unknown 0209(none) at ( 94: 32) is dasdi : unknown 020a(none) at ( 94: 36) is dasdj : unknown 020b(none) at ( 94: 40) is dasdk : unknown 020c(none) at ( 94: 44) is dasdl : unknown 020d(none) at ( 94: 48) is dasdm : unknown 020e(none) at ( 94: 52) is dasdn : unknown 020f(none) at ( 94: 56) is dasdo : unknown Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): s390utils-1.1.7-2 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1.add or delete devices in /etc/zipl.conf 2.execute zipl 3.reboot Actual results: - did not see new devices - delete devices did not "go away" Expected results: - new devices should be allowed for allocation and specified under /proc/dasd/devices - delete devices should NOT be specified under /proc/dasd/devices Additional info: probably is a problem under s390 also
mkinitrd must be invoked again, the dasd settings will get copied into the initrd with that. Does this resolve the issues? greetings, Florian La Roche
The previous Redhat distros did not require the "mkinitrd". I did try with mkinitrd and then zipl, but it still doesn't recognize changes. lnxerh.bmc.com # mkinitrd /boot/initrd.image 2.4.21-4.EL mkinitrd /boot/initrd.image 2.4.21-4.EL lnxerh.bmc.com # cat /etc/zipl.conf cat /etc/zipl.conf Ãdefaultboot¨ default=linux target=/boot/ Ãlinux¨ image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-4.EL ramdisk=/boot/initrd.image parameters="dasd=201-20F,0191,01B4-01BF root=/dev/dasda1" lnxerh.bmc.com # zipl zipl Building bootmap : /boot//bootmap Processing section : linux adding file to bootmap : /boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-4.EL located at 0x00010000 adding file to bootmap : /boot/initrd.image located at 0x00800000 adding file to bootmap : /boot//parmfile.1 located at 0x00001000 Trailer entries used : 7 out of 256 Bootloader for ECKD type devices with z/OS compatible layout installed. Syncing disks.... ...done lnxerh.bmc.com # cat /boot/parmfile.1 cat /boot/parmfile.1 dasd=201-20F,0191,01B4-01BF root=/dev/dasda1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~REBOOTED~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ipl 201 clear Linux version 2.4.21-4.EL (bhcompile.redhat.com) (gcc version 3.2.3 20030502 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-20)) #1 SMP Fri Oct 3 17:30:41 EDT 2003 We are running under VM (64 bit mode) On node 0 totalpages: 32768 zone(0): 32768 pages. zone(1): 0 pages. zone(2): 0 pages. Kernel command line: dasd=201-20F,0191,01B4-01BF root=/dev/dasda1 ............... lnxerh.bmc.com # cat /proc/dasd/devices cat /proc/dasd/devices 0201(ECKD) at ( 94: 0) is dasda : active at blocksize: 4096, 126000 blocks, 492 MB 0202(ECKD) at ( 94: 4) is dasdb : active at blocksize: 4096, 486000 blocks, 1898 MB 0203(none) at ( 94: 8) is dasdc : unknown 0204(none) at ( 94: 12) is dasdd : unknown 0205(none) at ( 94: 16) is dasde : unknown 0206(none) at ( 94: 20) is dasdf : unknown 0207(none) at ( 94: 24) is dasdg : unknown 0208(none) at ( 94: 28) is dasdh : unknown 0209(none) at ( 94: 32) is dasdi : unknown 020a(none) at ( 94: 36) is dasdj : unknown 020b(none) at ( 94: 40) is dasdk : unknown 020c(none) at ( 94: 44) is dasdl : unknown 020d(none) at ( 94: 48) is dasdm : unknown 020e(none) at ( 94: 52) is dasdn : unknown 020f(none) at ( 94: 56) is dasdo : unknown lnxerh.bmc.com #
I think this one was cleared up via email. greetings, Florian La Roche