counting scsi hosts

[listrcv]

Hi,

when unloading and reloading SCSI modules, the number of SCSI hosts is 
increased like this:



May 16 11:52:58 prometheus kernel: st: Unloaded.
May 16 11:54:56 prometheus kernel: PCI: Enabling device :02:02.0 
(0016 - 0017)
May 16 11:54:56 prometheus kernel: scsi3 : Adaptec AIC79XX PCI-X SCSI 
HBA DRIVER, Rev 1.3.11
May 16 11:54:56 prometheus kernel: Adaptec 29320A Ultra320 SCSI 
adapter
May 16 11:54:56 prometheus kernel: aic7901: Ultra320 Wide 
Channel A, SCSI Id=7, PCI 33 or 66Mhz, 512 SCBs

May 16 11:54:56 prometheus kernel:
May 16 11:56:46 prometheus kernel: (scsi3:A:0): 80.000MB/s transfers 
(40.000MHz, 16bit)
May 16 11:56:46 prometheus kernel: (scsi3:A:1): 80.000MB/s transfers 
(40.000MHz, 16bit)
May 16 11:56:49 prometheus kernel:   Vendor: EXABYTE   Model: VXA 1x10 
1U   Rev: A102
May 16 11:56:49 prometheus kernel:   Type:   Medium Changer 
ANSI SCSI revision: 04
May 16 11:56:49 prometheus kernel:   Vendor: EXABYTE   Model: VXA-2 
Rev: 100E
May 16 11:56:49 prometheus kernel:   Type:   Sequential-Access 
ANSI SCSI revision: 02
May 16 11:57:49 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, 
channel 0, id 0, lun 0,  type 0
May 16 11:57:49 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi generic sg1 at scsi3, 
channel 0, id 0, lun 0,  type 8
May 16 11:57:49 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi generic sg2 at scsi3, 
channel 0, id 1, lun 0,  type 1
May 16 11:57:53 prometheus kernel: st: Version 20040403, fixed bufsize 
32768, s/g segs 256
May 16 11:57:53 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi tape st0 at scsi3, 
channel 0, id 1, lun 0
May 16 11:57:53 prometheus kernel: st0: try direct i/o: yes (alignment 
512 B), max page reachable by HBA 134217727

May 16 11:59:17 prometheus kernel: st: Unloaded.
May 16 11:59:33 prometheus kernel: PCI: Enabling device :02:02.0 
(0016 - 0017)
May 16 11:59:33 prometheus kernel: scsi4 : Adaptec AIC79XX PCI-X SCSI 
HBA DRIVER, Rev 1.3.11
May 16 11:59:33 prometheus kernel: Adaptec 29320A Ultra320 SCSI 
adapter
May 16 11:59:33 prometheus kernel: aic7901: Ultra320 Wide 
Channel A, SCSI Id=7, PCI 33 or 66Mhz, 512 SCBs

May 16 11:59:33 prometheus kernel:
May 16 11:59:48 prometheus kernel: (scsi4:A:0): 80.000MB/s transfers 
(40.000MHz, 16bit)
May 16 11:59:49 prometheus kernel: (scsi4:A:1): 80.000MB/s transfers 
(40.000MHz, 16bit)
May 16 11:59:52 prometheus kernel:   Vendor: EXABYTE   Model: VXA 1x10 
1U   Rev: A102
May 16 11:59:52 prometheus kernel:   Type:   Medium Changer 
ANSI SCSI revision: 04
May 16 11:59:52 prometheus kernel:   Vendor: EXABYTE   Model: VXA-2 
Rev: 100E
May 16 11:59:52 prometheus kernel:   Type:   Sequential-Access 
ANSI SCSI revision: 02
May 16 12:00:01 prometheus /USR/SBIN/CRON[29646]: (root) CMD (setfacl -R 
-m o::rwx /share/data/archiv/Ablage_CV/  setfacl -R -m d:o::rwx 
/share/data/archiv/Ablage_CV/  setfacl -R -m u::rwx 
/share/data/archiv/Ablage_CV/)
May 16 12:00:15 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, 
channel 0, id 0, lun 0,  type 0
May 16 12:00:15 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi generic sg1 at scsi4, 
channel 0, id 0, lun 0,  type 8
May 16 12:00:15 prometheus kernel: Attached scsi generic sg2 at scsi4, 
channel 0, id 1, lun 0,  type 1



At some time, a limit (like 32?) might prevent me from reloading the 
modules and force me to reboot.


Is it normal that the kernel (2.6.9 SMP) or the modules seems to think 
that the number of SCSI hosts is increasing though they aren't? Is there 
a way to reuse host numbers that have been used previously?



GH


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: hard disk fails? / mounted read-only

[listrcv]

Igor TAmara wrote:


Is it safe to try to use hdparm ? to disable dma on the conf?


It is relatively safe to backup the data, then replace the cables. If 
that fixes the problem, run at least software RAID1 --- if not, return 
the disk(s) and run at least software RAID1. If that doesn't help 
either, investigate further.


Disks can fail after only 4 months and sooner. Spending effort into 
broken or unreliable disks other than for recovering data is not 
worthwhile. Cutting costs by not using a decent hardware RAID controller 
is out of question if the extra cost for the controller is less than the 
cost of the downtime and/or data loss involved when a disk fails.



GH


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Xinerama

[listrcv]

Rob van Kraanen wrote:

Modes   [EMAIL PROTECTED]


omit the @100?


GH


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]