i never gave much about this, and iirc, it has always been like this - but it just came to my mind, so i`d like to give a comment here.
if you start uml just by executing ./linux, besides that kernel panic you get a rather long error message and a segmentation fault in the end.
just wondering if an end user should see that at all - is this inentional or is it just misbehaviour which not yet has been adressed ?
Initialized stdio console driver
Console initialized on /dev/tty0
console [tty0] enabled
Initializing software serial port version 1
console [mc-1] enabled
Couldn't stat "root_fs" : err = 2
Failed to initialize ubd device 0 :Couldn't determine size of device's file
VFS: Cannot open root device "98:0" or unknown-block(98,0)
Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions:
Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(98,0)
EIP: 0073:[<ffffe410>] CPU: 0 Not tainted ESP: 007b:bffde5f8 EFLAGS: 00000246
EAX: 00000000 EBX: 00002a61 ECX: 00000013 EDX: 00002a61
ESI: 00002a5d EDI: 00000001 EBP: bffde61c DS: 007b ES: 007b
09c5ae70: [<08069a34>] show_regs+0xb4/0xb9
09c5ae9c: [<0805889f>] panic_exit+0x25/0x3b
09c5aeb0: [<0808478c>] notifier_call_chain+0x21/0x46
09c5aed0: [<08084827>] __atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x17/0x19
09c5aeec: [<0808483e>] atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x15/0x17
09c5af08: [<080705f6>] panic+0x52/0xdd
09c5af28: [<08049a59>] mount_block_root+0xf8/0x10e
09c5af7c: [<08049abb>] mount_root+0x4c/0x54
09c5afa0: [<08049bcf>] prepare_namespace+0x10c/0x133
09c5afa8: [<08049787>] kernel_init+0x68/0x71
09c5afb4: [<08063d25>] run_kernel_thread+0x37/0x42
09c5afe0: [<08056562>] new_thread_handler+0x57/0x7e
09c5affc: [<00000000>] 0x0
Bis 50 MB Dateianhänge? Kein Problem!
From: Jeff Dike <jdike@ad...> - 2008-04-05 03:42:41
On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 12:30:36AM +0200, devzero@... wrote:
> if you start uml just by executing ./linux, besides that kernel
> panic you get a rather long error message and a segmentation fault in
> the end.
> just wondering if an end user should see that at all - is this
> inentional or is it just misbehaviour which not yet has been
This is on purpose. I started it to dump core on panic so there's
something more for me to look at besides a stack trace. This is also
why it started printing the core dump limits.
Granted, this looks sort of silly when the panic is due to no root
filesystem, but it is very useful when there's some segfault in some
random place in the kernel.
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com