Discussion:
Bug#1032362: Kernel doesn't find SATA ports on Softiron 1000 (arm64 Seattle)
(too old to reply)
Steve McIntyre
2023-03-05 02:20:01 UTC
Permalink
Source: linux
Version: 6.1.12-1
Severity: important
Hey folks,
I've just upgraded my Seattle-based system to bookworm and it no
longer finds the onboard AHCI SATA storage so it stops at an initramfs
prompt. Going back to the current bullseye kernel (5.10.162-1), it all
works just fine.
As far as I can see, the DTB hasn't changed in this area. The
non-booting system still has plausible-looking entries for the sATA
I'll try to bisect and see where things stopped working...
The failure appears in between

Linux maul 6.0.0-6-arm64 #1 SMP Debian 6.0.12-1 (2022-12-09) aarch64 GNU/Linux

and

Linux (none) 6.1.0-0-arm64 #1 SMP Debian 6.1~rc3-1~exp1 (2022-11-02) aarch64 GNU/Linux

A quick look at the output of

"git diff -r debian/6.0.12-1..debian/6.1_rc3-1_exp1"

in the debian linux tree doesn't show me anything likely,
BICBW. Adding a CC to the debian-arm list in case any of our friendly
local ARM kernel folks might be able to help...
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. ***@einval.com
"When C++ is your hammer, everything looks like a thumb." -- Steven M. Haflich
Diederik de Haas
2023-03-05 11:00:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve McIntyre
Source: linux
Version: 6.1.12-1
I've just upgraded my Seattle-based system to bookworm and it no
longer finds the onboard AHCI SATA storage so it stops at an initramfs
I'll try to bisect and see where things stopped working...
The failure appears in between
Linux maul 6.0.0-6-arm64 #1 SMP Debian 6.0.12-1 (2022-12-09) aarch64 GNU/Linux
and
Linux (none) 6.1.0-0-arm64 #1 SMP Debian 6.1~rc3-1~exp1 (2022-11-02) aarch64 GNU/Linux
A quick look at the output of
"git diff -r debian/6.0.12-1..debian/6.1_rc3-1_exp1"
in the debian linux tree doesn't show me anything likely,
BICBW. Adding a CC to the debian-arm list in case any of our friendly
local ARM kernel folks might be able to help...
Based on ardb's comment on #debian-arm wrt CONFIG_AHCI_DWC being needed now, I
found upstream commit 33629d35090f5ce2b1b4ce78aa39954c603536d5

So if you could focus your git bisect action around that commit, that should
clarify whether that's indeed the 'offending' commit.
Building a 6.1 kernel with CONFIG_AHCI_DWC enabled (as module) should tell you
whether that's indeed the needed change to fix this.

HTH,
Diederik

Loading...