Bug 27432

Summary:	I don't understand one of the kernel boot error messages
Product:	Base System	Reporter:	SMurphy <SMurphy>
Component:	kern	Assignee:	Yar Tikhiy <yar>
Status:	Closed FIXED
Severity:	Affects Only Me
Priority:	Normal
Version:	4.3-RELEASE
Hardware:	Any
OS:	Any

Description SMurphy 2001-05-18 17:50:00 UTC

isa0: too many dependant configs (8)

This message appears during the probe phase of boot up.  It happens 
after the kernel finishes probing the pci0 bus and the line before 
the fdc0 floppy controller.

The devices found on the pci0 bus are: isab0 at device 7.0 (isa0), 
atapci0 at device 7.1 (ata0, ata1), uhci0 at device 7.2 (usb0, uhub0), 
ATI Mach64-GI graphics accelerator at 8.0, unknown card (vendor=104b, 
dev=8130) at 9.0 (see Note 1), and vr0 at device 11.0 (mmibus0, amphy0).

Now, my thought is that it found the host to PCI bridge, then scanned 
the PCI bus.  Having found the ISA bridge on the pci0 bus, a scan of 
the isa0 bus seems to be next.  It is at this point where the "isa0" 
error message displays.

After the message, it does probe the rest of the ISA bus: the floppy 
controller, the keyboard controller, vga0, the system console, I/O 
ports, the sound card (SB AWE64 Gold), and the hard drives.

I would be grateful for your thoughts on what is wrong, and how to
fix it.

Thanks In Advance ~ TIA,
-Shawn

Note 1:  The <unknown card> is my SCSI card.  I suspect that it is 
unknown because it is a BusLogic FlashPoint card, and it is 
advertised that there is no support for it.  I would take this 
opportunity to beg for it!  I have 3 CD-ROM drives, a CD burner, 
and a scanner on my SCSI Bus.  I have flashed the BIOS to at least 
version 1.41, and I am not sure, but I think it is version 1.41i.

P.S. I just happened to think that it might be my modem.  It slipped 
my mind, because I have internet service from my LAN, and LINT didn't 
make much mention of modems.  Do you think this is it?  It doesn't make 
sense to me, because the serial ports are not probed until later.

How would I go about getting modem drivers for a WiseComm Accellerator 
Pro Internal 56k with Voice (full hardware, I believe) Modem.  The 
file I downloaded for Win32 is M56VIWRP.EXE.  I still have the file, 
but that doesn't do me any good now. =)

How-To-Repeat: Just reboot the computer, it happens at every boot.  It even happens 
when booting with the GENERIC kernel.

Comment 1 Yar Tikhiy freebsd_committer

2001-06-03 09:07:25 UTC

Please try increasing MAXDEP (file /usr/src/sys/isa/pnpparse.c at about line
39).
Unfortunately, the kernel message is rather misleading because the number
"8" in it is the MAXDEP value, not the actual number of dependencies in your
PnP configuration.
--
Yar

Comment 2 SMurphy 2001-06-05 04:39:20 UTC

Yar,

Thank you for the advice, it did fix the problem.  What would you 
recommend for a value?  I doubled it (to 16).  Will that cause any 
problems.  Will it cause inefficiency?

Thanks for your time,
-Shawn

On 3 Jun 2001, at 12:07, Yar Tikhiy wrote:

> Please try increasing MAXDEP (file /usr/src/sys/isa/pnpparse.c at
> about line 39). Unfortunately, the kernel message is rather misleading
> because the number "8" in it is the MAXDEP value, not the actual
> number of dependencies in your PnP configuration. -- Yar
>

Comment 3 Yar Tikhiy freebsd_committer

2001-06-06 15:05:46 UTC

No, it won't. The code is executed only at the boot time, when
the kernel is configuring PnP devices.

As for the parameter value, the kernel warning should have shown
you the right number, but it did not due to a bug. I'll fix the
corresponding printf() so it shows the neccessary information. For
now, if 16 works for you, keep that value.

On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 10:39:20PM -0500, Shawn Murphy wrote:
> 
> Thank you for the advice, it did fix the problem.  What would you 
> recommend for a value?  I doubled it (to 16).  Will that cause any 
> problems.  Will it cause inefficiency?
> 
> Thanks for your time,
> -Shawn
> 
> On 3 Jun 2001, at 12:07, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> 
> > Please try increasing MAXDEP (file /usr/src/sys/isa/pnpparse.c at
> > about line 39). Unfortunately, the kernel message is rather misleading
> > because the number "8" in it is the MAXDEP value, not the actual
> > number of dependencies in your PnP configuration. -- Yar

-- 
Yar

Comment 4 Kris Kennaway freebsd_committer

2001-08-19 10:56:27 UTC

State Changed
From-To: open->analyzed

Over to yar who said there was a change he wanted to make in 
response to this PR.

Comment 5 Kris Kennaway freebsd_committer

2001-08-19 10:56:27 UTC

Responsible Changed
From-To: freebsd-bugs->yar

Comment 6 Yar Tikhiy freebsd_committer

2001-08-21 05:49:32 UTC

State Changed
From-To: analyzed->closed

I've took a closer look at the PnP code... 
The current state of affairs is that the number of dependent 
configs cannot be predicted without parsing all the PnP data, 
so it was me who was wrong when I said that the diagnostic 
printf() was wrong.