I wrote on 2007-01-02: > Kyuma Ohta wrote: > ... >> Now,I'm testing 2.6.20-rc3 for x86_64, submitted patch for this issue; >> "Fault has happened in 'cleanuped' sbp2/1394 module in *not 32bit* >> architecture hardwares ." >> >> As result of, sbp2 driver in 2.6.20-rc3 is seems to running >> w/o any faults,but communication both host and harddrive(s) >> was seems to be unstable yet :-( >> Sometimes confuse packets,such as *very* older 1394 driver :-( > > That is, sbp2 on 2.6.20-rc3 works less stable for you than on 2.6.19? Or > which previous kernel is the basis of your comparison? Are there any log > messages or other diagnostics? And what hardware do you have? > > If you can tell which kernel was good for you, I could create a set of > patches for you which allows to revert sbp2 while keeping the rest of > the kernel at the level of 2.6.20-rc3, so that you could find the > destabilizing change (if it happened in sbp2, not somewhere else). [...]
So, how about it? Is there an actual regression? If so, we should find the cause and fix before 2.6.20 is released. Note, sbp2's optional parameter serialize_io=0 does not work correctly yet with some devices (it never did), therefore use sbp2 with anything than default parameters if there are problems. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== ---= =--=- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/