You are not logged in.

#1 2016-07-02 05:49:23

jayendra
Member
Registered: 2016-06-10
Posts: 39

[Solved]No network at all.

After current updates I am unable to start gdm/gnome and networking is also not working.
hitting ip a shows nothing but the loopback,

1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1
    link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
    inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 ::1/128 scope host 
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

although ethernet and wireless drivers are listed by the lscpi.

3b:00.0 Ethernet controller: Qualcomm Atheros Killer E2400 Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 10)

and

3c:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter (rev 32)

dhcpcd fails to start as it couldn't find the interface.

● dhcpcd.service - dhcpcd on all interfaces
   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/dhcpcd.service; disabled; vendor preset: disabled)
   Active: active (running) since Sat 2016-07-02 16:09:56 IST; 19min ago
  Process: 14915 ExecStart=/usr/bin/dhcpcd -q -b (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
 Main PID: 14917 (dhcpcd)
    Tasks: 1 (limit: 512)
   CGroup: /system.slice/dhcpcd.service
           └─14917 /usr/bin/dhcpcd -q -b

Jul 02 16:09:56 alienware systemd[1]: Starting dhcpcd on all interfaces...
Jul 02 16:09:56 alienware dhcpcd[14915]: dev: loaded udev
Jul 02 16:09:56 alienware dhcpcd[14915]: no valid interfaces found
Jul 02 16:09:56 alienware dhcpcd[14915]: forked to background, child pid 14917
Jul 02 16:09:56 alienware systemd[1]: Started dhcpcd on all interfaces.

The other thing which is not related to networking but, gdm.service also couldn't start.

● gdm.service - GNOME Display Manager
   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/gdm.service; enabled; vendor preset: disabled)
   Active: active (running) since Sat 2016-07-02 15:57:50 IST; 31min ago
 Main PID: 834 (gdm)
    Tasks: 3 (limit: 512)
   CGroup: /system.slice/gdm.service
           └─834 /usr/bin/gdm

Jul 02 15:59:16 alienware gdm[834]: Unable to kill session worker process
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: GdmDisplay: display lasted 0.227892 seconds
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Child process -14720 was already dead.
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Child process 14704 was already dead.
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Unable to kill session worker process
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Could not start command '/usr/lib/gdm/gdm-session-worker': Too many open files
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: GLib: g_child_watch_add_full: assertion 'pid > 0' failed
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Child process -14754 was already dead.
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Child process 14736 was already dead.
Jul 02 15:59:17 alienware gdm[834]: Unable to kill session worker process

what the hell went wrong?

Last edited by jayendra (2016-07-04 17:06:57)

Offline

#2 2016-07-02 10:57:10

Spider.007
Member
Registered: 2004-06-20
Posts: 1,175

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

What happens when you modprobe alx? Also, although not required this might be of interest to you: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=203723

Offline

#3 2016-07-02 14:53:04

ewaller
Administrator
From: Pasadena, CA
Registered: 2009-07-13
Posts: 19,739

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

As a sanity check, are the versions reported by pacman -Qi linux and uname -a match?  (Assuming you are running the mainline kernel.  Adjust the first command if you are not)

Last edited by ewaller (2016-07-02 14:53:22)


Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Offline

#4 2016-07-03 07:44:39

jayendra
Member
Registered: 2016-06-10
Posts: 39

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

ewaller
your suspicion is right, something is messed up there. Kernel version's are not matching.
pacman is saying

Version         : 4.6.3-1

while uname is not matching it, and showing this.

Linux alienware 4.6.2-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed Jun 8 08:40:59 CEST 2016 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Spider.007
modeprobe couldn't find the module alx

modprobe: FATAL: Module alx not found in directory /lib/modules/4.6.2-1ARCH

While updating the machine it was running on battery, and as soon as update comlpeted(or may be eariler I don't remember excatly) it died due to low battery.  That might caused this?

Offline

#5 2016-07-03 14:59:45

ewaller
Administrator
From: Pasadena, CA
Registered: 2009-07-13
Posts: 19,739

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

It is likely that the boot partition is not mounted on the /boot mount point -- or at least it as not when you did the last upgrade in which the kernel was changed..  Thus, the kernel in your boot partition is stale.  That kernel can no longer find its loadable modules as they have been replaced with those for the new kernel.

Check to see if your boot partition is mounted on /boot using the mount mount command.   If it is not mounted, then go ahead and mount it then do a pacman -S linux.  That will reinstall the kernel and (this time) will write the kernel to the boot partition. 
If it was mounted -- stop.  We have some more diagnostics to do.

Then, reboot and and the versions should match.  If all is well, let me know.  Then there is a little bit of clean up we might want to look into.


Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Offline

#6 2016-07-04 03:07:31

jayendra
Member
Registered: 2016-06-10
Posts: 39

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

I cannot mount the boot-partition, mount doesn't recognize vfat filesystem. It is dual-boot(Arch+Windows10) with UEFI. /dev/sda1 is my efi partition.
Hitting mount /dev/sda1 /boot gives me this

mount: unknown filesystem type 'vfat'

I later tried lsmod | grep vfat, but didn't get any output.

I hope there is no dead end!!

Offline

#7 2016-07-04 03:16:31

ewaller
Administrator
From: Pasadena, CA
Registered: 2009-07-13
Posts: 19,739

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

Damn.  Okay, the next solution is to boot your install media and to chroot.  You will need to mount your root partition, then your boot partition just as you did when you first installed.  Enter the chroot, install the linux package.  You may want to fix your /etc/fstab file while you are in there.  Then leave the chroot and reboot.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/change_root


Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Offline

#8 2016-07-04 17:06:34

jayendra
Member
Registered: 2016-06-10
Posts: 39

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

updating kernel with chrooting solved my issue. Thanks ewaller

I have some related questions!
How did you infer that the my linux kernel is not updated? how it happend ?
why pacman -Qi linux was different than uname, shouldn't both print the version of installed linux kernel?

If you are too lazy to answer them, just give me pointers to find the answer

Offline

#9 2016-07-04 17:13:26

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 29,445
Website

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

jayendra wrote:

why pacman -Qi linux was different than uname, shouldn't both print the version of installed linux kernel?

No.  Pacman gives the version of the installed kernel.  Uname gives the version of the running kernel.  It is easy for the installed kernel to be of a newer version than the running kernel.  This will happen anytime you update the kernel but have not yet rebooted into the newly installed kernel.

So when these mismatch, the first sugestion would be to reboot.

If there is a mismatch after rebooting, then it is likely that the on-disk kernel in /boot is different than the package that was installed.  The most likely cause of this is that a boot partition was not mounted when the kernel was updated.  If this happens, the package is installed, but the new kernel is placed in the /boot/ directory on the root partition.  This is later masked by the boot partition being mounted over it (and the old kernel is still in that boot partition).


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#10 2016-07-04 18:22:57

ewaller
Administrator
From: Pasadena, CA
Registered: 2009-07-13
Posts: 19,739

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

Lazy?  Nah.  Have a life in meatspace? Yeah.

Glad it is working.  Trilby's answers are spot on.  And, they touch on my prior comments.   Let's make sure this does not happen again.  Please post the output of mount and the contents of /etc/fstab

As Trilby points out, there are likely some files in /boot of your root partition that you cannot see if the boot *partition* is mounted on /boot.  So, we are checking that the partition is properly mounted.  If it is, we will take note of its contents, then we will unmount the boot partition and take a peek in the /boot *directory* and see what is in there and possibly clean them up.  Then we will remount the boot partition


Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Offline

#11 2016-07-06 02:47:41

jayendra
Member
Registered: 2016-06-10
Posts: 39

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

Great Thanks,
But I can't still understands why the running version can be different from installed?. If the new kernel has been installed then from where system is getting the old kernel to load? How this works?

Offline

#12 2016-07-06 04:30:30

ewaller
Administrator
From: Pasadena, CA
Registered: 2009-07-13
Posts: 19,739

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

*sigh*  The kernel that is running was loaded by the bootloader.  The bootloader is stupid.  Whatever kernel that is on your boot partition is going to be used by the bootloader (unless you go out of your way to put multiple kernels on your boot partition and you created a custom bootloader configuration -- let us assume this is not the case.)

How did the kernel get on the boot partition?  You put it there.  Probably when you did the installation. 
When the bootloader loads the kernel, it tells that kernel where to find the root partition.
The kernel then reads that root partition for information about where to mount volumes, what services to run, etc.
Some of these things will require kernel modules.  The kernel needs to find these modules.  As the kernel is self aware, and knows its own name, it uses its name to determine where on the root partition to look on the root partition for its modules.

When you installed your system, you may have been in a hurry and missed a step.  You did not tell the kernel to mount the boot partition on the /boot mount point of the root partition. 
Life is good.  Dogs and cats are living together.

You upgrade the kernel.  The old kernel modules are removed from the root partition.  The new kernel modules are written to the root partition.

SINCE YOU DID NOT HAVE THE BOOT PARTITION MOUNTED, THE NEW KERNEL IS WRITTEN TO THE /boot DIRECTORY/  -- IT IS *NOT* WRITTEN TO THE BOOT PARTITION.

You reboot,  The UNMODIFIED boot PARTITION has the old kernel -- since the boot partition had not been mounted on the /boot mount point of the root PARTITION when you did the upgrade.

When that kernel looks for its modules (based on its name, which it knows), it cannot find them


Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Offline

#13 2016-07-06 05:49:37

jayendra
Member
Registered: 2016-06-10
Posts: 39

Re: [Solved]No network at all.

Gotcha

ewaller wrote:

When you installed your system, you may have been in a hurry and missed a step.  You did not tell the kernel to mount the boot partition on the /boot mount point of the root partition.

I am glad that I missed that step. big_smile

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB