On 1/25/08, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Actually, I suspect your issues should be fixed by this patch:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=e2d435ea4084022ab88efa74214accb45b1f9e92
>
> Could you download 2.6.24 and try it out to see if t
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 19:50 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> I get the following:
> SAH
> SSH
> SCB Q
> SCB EXEC
> SCB EXEC DONE
Actually, I suspect your issues should be fixed by this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=e2d435ea4084022ab88efa7
I get the following:
SAH
SSH
SCB Q
SCB EXEC
SCB EXEC DONE
After ~3 secs the system freezes.
On Jan 22, 2008 12:20 AM, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok my attempt to get the card failed so we are going to have to do this
> the hard way. See where this patch crashes and what it prints
>
Ok my attempt to get the card failed so we are going to have to do this
the hard way. See where this patch crashes and what it prints
(On top of the other patches)
diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude
linux.vanilla-2.6.24-rc8-mm1/drivers/scsi/initio.c
linux-2.6.24-rc8-
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 14:59 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:16:06 -0600
> James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 14:28 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > > On 1/11/08, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fr
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:16:06 -0600
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 14:28 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > On 1/11/08, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 18:44 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > > > On Jan 1
On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 14:28 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> On 1/11/08, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 18:44 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > > On Jan 11, 2008 5:44 PM, James Bottomley
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I hav
On 1/11/08, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 18:44 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > On Jan 11, 2008 5:44 PM, James Bottomley
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I havent reported "initio: I/O port range 0x0 is busy."
> > >
> > > Sorry ... we app
On 01/11/2008 10:44 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> This proves the BAR0 to be non zero, but I also take it from your report
>>> that the
>>>
>>> initio: I/O port range 0x0 is busy.
>>>
>>> message is also gone?
>>>
>>
>> I havent reported "initio: I/O port range 0x0 is busy."
>
> Sorry ... we appe
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 17:01 +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Yes it works under 2.6.16.13. See the beginning of this thread, i
> > mention there some things about newer versions.
>
> It worked (ish.. it has problems and always has had) before the big
> updates, and according to my tester after the big
> Yes it works under 2.6.16.13. See the beginning of this thread, i
> mention there some things about newer versions.
It worked (ish.. it has problems and always has had) before the big
updates, and according to my tester after the big update + two patches
that escaped somewhere in the process. U
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 18:44 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2008 5:44 PM, James Bottomley
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I havent reported "initio: I/O port range 0x0 is busy."
> >
> > Sorry ... we appear to have several reporters of different bugs in this
> > thread. T
On Jan 11, 2008 5:44 PM, James Bottomley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I havent reported "initio: I/O port range 0x0 is busy."
>
> Sorry ... we appear to have several reporters of different bugs in this
> thread. That message was copied by Chuck Ebbert from a Red Hat
> bugzilla ... I was assu
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 11:54 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2008 7:16 AM, James Bottomley
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 02:18 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > > First of all let me wish a happy new year.
> > > I come back from the vacations and
On Jan 11, 2008 7:16 AM, James Bottomley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 02:18 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > First of all let me wish a happy new year.
> > I come back from the vacations and i compiled the initio driver with
> >
> > #define DEBUG_INTERRUPT 1
> > #defi
On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 02:18 +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> First of all let me wish a happy new year.
> I come back from the vacations and i compiled the initio driver with
>
> #define DEBUG_INTERRUPT 1
> #define DEBUG_QUEUE 1
> #define DEBUG_STATE 1
> #define INT_DISC1
>
First of all let me wish a happy new year.
I come back from the vacations and i compiled the initio driver with
#define DEBUG_INTERRUPT 1
#define DEBUG_QUEUE 1
#define DEBUG_STATE 1
#define INT_DISC1
I used the sources from 2.6.24-rc6-git9 kernel. At kernel boot time the initio
dr
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 17:43 -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 12/21/2007 04:03 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:30 -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> >> On 12/19/2007 03:48 AM, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> >>> On Dec 17, 2007 2:18 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On 12/21/2007 04:03 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:30 -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
>> On 12/19/2007 03:48 AM, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
>>> On Dec 17, 2007 2:18 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have found one problem. Please try patch [2] below and report.
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:30 -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 12/19/2007 03:48 AM, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 2007 2:18 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I have found one problem. Please try patch [2] below and report.
> >> If it still fails try to enable debugging by
On 12/19/2007 03:48 AM, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2007 2:18 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have found one problem. Please try patch [2] below and report.
>> If it still fails try to enable debugging by setting with patch [1]
>> these values at top of drivers/scsi/i
On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 01:32 -0800, Natalie Protasevich wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2007 9:05 AM, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:50:40AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > So, to get the best of both worlds, file a bugzilla and note the bugid.
> > > Then email a c
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:32:02AM -0800, Natalie Protasevich wrote:
> > The problem is that it appears to the casual observer as if they can
> > then add information to the bug through the web interface. But that
> > information will never be forwarded to the mailing list. Unless there's
> > a w
On Dec 19, 2007 9:05 AM, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:50:40AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > So, to get the best of both worlds, file a bugzilla and note the bugid.
> > Then email a complete report to the relevant list, but add [BUG ]
> > to the subject
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:50:40AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> So, to get the best of both worlds, file a bugzilla and note the bugid.
> Then email a complete report to the relevant list, but add [BUG ]
> to the subject line and cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you do
> this, bugzilla will keep track o
On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 06:29 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> > Would it be better to open a bug report at bugzilla?
>
> No, it wouldn't. Bugzilla is a place where bug reports go to be
> ignored. Witness 9370 where despite my
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Filippos Papadopoulos wrote:
> Would it be better to open a bug report at bugzilla?
No, it wouldn't. Bugzilla is a place where bug reports go to be
ignored. Witness 9370 where despite my best efforts to move discussion
to the mailing list, it's been thor
On Wed, Dec 19 2007 at 10:48 +0200, "Filippos Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2007 2:18 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have found one problem. Please try patch [2] below and report.
>> If it still fails try to enable debugging by setting with patch [1]
>> th
On Dec 17, 2007 2:18 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have found one problem. Please try patch [2] below and report.
> If it still fails try to enable debugging by setting with patch [1]
> these values at top of drivers/scsi/initio.c. And send dmsgs.
>
> Boaz
>
I tried patch[2] (ad
On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 18:20 +0200, Olivier Galibert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 06:08:59PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> Below fixes a deadly typo. Might as well be included in 2.6.24
>
> You're sure ? scsi_for_each_sg includes a (sg)++ already...
>
>
>> s
> Well, the change log isn't very committal for "rush me immediately into
> main line" plus, as far as I could dig out, there was no confirmation
> that it actually worked. This way, I can now say please try the current
Without that change it always tries to use zero as the memory/io address
of t
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 06:08:59PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> Below fixes a deadly typo. Might as well be included in 2.6.24
You're sure ? scsi_for_each_sg includes a (sg)++ already...
> scsi_for_each_sg(cmnd, sglist, cblk->sglen, i) {
> sg->data = cpu_to_l
On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 17:03 +0200, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 14:36 +, Alan Cox wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:40:53 +0200
>> Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 15:05 +0200, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 14:36 +, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:40:53 +0200
> Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 15:05 +0200, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> initio doesn't seem to have a maintainer...
> > >>
> > >> Are you able to identify
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:40:53 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 15:05 +0200, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> initio doesn't seem to have a maintainer...
> >>
> >> Are you able to identify any earlier kernel which worked OK?
> >>
> >> Maybe it's a new de
On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 15:05 +0200, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> initio doesn't seem to have a maintainer...
>>
>> Are you able to identify any earlier kernel which worked OK?
>>
>> Maybe it's a new device? If you can get the `lspci -vvxx' output
>> for that device we can take a look.
>
> initio doesn't seem to have a maintainer...
>
> Are you able to identify any earlier kernel which worked OK?
>
> Maybe it's a new device? If you can get the `lspci -vvxx' output
> for that device we can take a look.
If I remember rightly the fixes for this went into the scsi tree a couple
of
On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 14:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 13:41 +0200, "Filippos Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Dec 17, 2007 1:18 PM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:39:47 +0200 "Filippos Papadopoulos"
On Mon, Dec 17 2007 at 13:41 +0200, "Filippos Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2007 1:18 PM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:39:47 +0200 "Filippos Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL
>> PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I have got an INITIO 9100 UW SCSI C
On Dec 17, 2007 1:18 PM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:39:47 +0200 "Filippos Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I have got an INITIO 9100 UW SCSI Controller with an IBM
> > IC35L036UWD210-0 scsi hard disk on a 32 bit x86 system.
> > Curre
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:39:47 +0200 "Filippos Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
> I have got an INITIO 9100 UW SCSI Controller with an IBM
> IC35L036UWD210-0 scsi hard disk on a 32 bit x86 system.
> Currently i have SUSE 10.1 (Kernel 2.6.16).
>
> I tried to install OpenSUSE 10.3 (ker
Hi,
I have got an INITIO 9100 UW SCSI Controller with an IBM
IC35L036UWD210-0 scsi hard disk on a 32 bit x86 system.
Currently i have SUSE 10.1 (Kernel 2.6.16).
I tried to install OpenSUSE 10.3 (kernel 2.6.22.5) and the latest
OpenSUSE 11.0 Alpha 0 (kernel 2.6.24-rc4) but although the initio
driv
42 matches
Mail list logo
