Le 2003-09-19, Dan Naumov écrivait :
Disabling atapicam in the kernel or detaching the drive from the system
works around the problem.
Please try the patch I posted a few moments ago under ATAng no good for
me/REQUEST_SENSE recovered from missing interrupt.
Thomas.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems Jan Srzednicki wrote:
As far as problems with dagrab and cdda2wav are conserned - this is
because of removal of CDIOCREADAUDIO ioctl in ATAng (see recent thread
What's happened to CDIOCREADAUDIO friends)
I've seen it (after posting the original mail, though;). Is there going
to
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 08:02:31AM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Jan Srzednicki wrote:
As far as problems with dagrab and cdda2wav are conserned - this is
because of removal of CDIOCREADAUDIO ioctl in ATAng (see recent thread
What's happened to CDIOCREADAUDIO friends)
I've
It seems Jan Srzednicki wrote:
dd if=/dev/acdXtY of=trackY bs=2352
Cool. ;)
Yes, and that has worked for ages...
Could you give me a hint what to put in devd.conf to get acdXtY files
created automatically when a CD is inserted?
You just need something to open the acdX device (so the
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
This panic isn't ATAPICAM related. Could you try the patch below? It's
against the cdrtools-devel port but should
On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 19:21, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
This panic isn't ATAPICAM related. Could you try the
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Dan Naumov wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 19:21, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
This
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
This panic isn't ATAPICAM related. Could you try the patch below?
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 06:21:52PM +0200, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
This panic isn't ATAPICAM related. Could
Who-hoo, it works!!! Thanks a bunch!!!
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
This panic isn't ATAPICAM
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 04:36:32PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 06:21:52PM +0200, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 05:51:25PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 02:17:21AM +0200, Marius Strobl wrote:
Isn't it still a kernel bug if a user process can trigger a panic?
Yes, it seems to be a bug in the mlockall(2) implementation. Backing
it out or hindering cdrecord to use it avoids the panic. I already
wrote an email to bms@
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 01:47:44AM +0100, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 02:17:21AM +0200, Marius Strobl wrote:
Isn't it still a kernel bug if a user process can trigger a panic?
Yes, it seems to be a bug in the mlockall(2) implementation. Backing
it out or hindering
Hello there,
I still have problems with ATAng, with kernel from 15th of September.
First of all, the drive still does not get detected properly. Funny
thing is that after some playing with atacontrol attach/detach, it
finally gets detected. And later on, it is normally detected, before.
Same
It seems Jan Srzednicki wrote:
First of all, the drive still does not get detected properly. Funny
thing is that after some playing with atacontrol attach/detach, it
finally gets detected. And later on, it is normally detected, before.
Same scenario happened like 3 times with ATAng and newer
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 03:54:36PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Jan Srzednicki wrote:
First of all, the drive still does not get detected properly. Funny
thing is that after some playing with atacontrol attach/detach, it
finally gets detected. And later on, it is normally detected,
Soren,
I've noticed the same thing with the last two builds.
After detaching and then re-attaching the second channel,
both my slave dvdrom and my truant master cdrw show up and appear
to work ok. I just tried your patch (didn't apply cleanly
so I edited the file myself). No apparent change.
It seems Jan Srzednicki wrote:
First of all, the drive still does not get detected properly. Funny
thing is that after some playing with atacontrol attach/detach, it
finally gets detected. And later on, it is normally detected, before.
Same scenario happened like 3 times with ATAng and
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:38:25PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote:
Anyhow, what I need to be able to tell what may be going on, is that
you boot verbose and get me the output from dmesg from a boot that
found all device, and from a boot that missed.
Anyone know how to make the message buffer
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:46:35AM -0500, Steve Ames wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:38:25PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote:
Anyhow, what I need to be able to tell what may be going on, is that
you boot verbose and get me the output from dmesg from a boot that
found all device, and from a
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Steve Ames wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:38:25PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote:
Anyhow, what I need to be able to tell what may be going on, is that
you boot verbose and get me the output from dmesg from a boot that
found all device, and from a boot that missed.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:55:07PM +0200, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:46:35AM -0500, Steve Ames wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:38:25PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote:
Anyhow, what I need to be able to tell what may be going on, is that
you boot verbose and get me the
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:00:56AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
Anyone know how to make the message buffer larger? I don't have
a serial console hooked up currently and a boot verbose is way
over the 32K default buffer size so only get the last 32K once
the system is booted up.
From
Le 2003-09-18, Jan Srzednicki écrivait :
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
Um. Do you see the same crash if both drives contain CDs at boot time?
If not, this could be a consequence of the error condition corruption
It seems Thomas Quinot wrote:
Le 2003-09-18, Jan Srzednicki écrivait :
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
Um. Do you see the same crash if both drives contain CDs at boot time?
If not, this could be a
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Thomas Quinot wrote:
Le 2003-09-18, Jan Srzednicki ?crivait :
Anyway, here's backtrace for atapicam panic I've mentioned. It's
triggered by:
cdrecord dev=1,1,0 /some/track
Um. Do you see the same crash if both drives contain CDs at boot time?
If not, this could
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 01:32:45AM +0300, Vladimir Kushnir wrote:
Um. Do you see the same crash if both drives contain CDs at boot time?
If not, this could be a consequence of the error condition corruption
problem others have been reporting.
Thomas.
These crashes started before
27 matches
Mail list logo
