Re: no disk drive detected at boot time

2007-01-15 Thread Jean-Max Reymond
Jean-Max Reymond a écrit : hi, The computer is an DELL 1600SC with SATA RAID. At boot time, no disk are detected. I have tried with Ubuntu Edgy and Fedora Core 6 and I have the same troubles. Fedora Core 2 is running on the computer. it seems that Dell CERC ATA100/4ch is not supported by any

RE: no disk drive detected at boot time

2007-01-15 Thread Patrick_Boyd
You might want to take a look at this. http://groups.google.com/group/linux.debian.bugs.dist/browse_thread/thread/54a1ca21b839ebf1/4a0cd669217f3c7d?lnk=strnum=1#4a0cd669217f3c7d According to that email you need firmware 6.61 or lower to use the current megaraid-mm and mbox drivers, however

Re: [Fwd: Re: aic79xx+ASC39320A crash]

2007-01-15 Thread Bjarne Thomsen
On Mon, 2007-01-01 at 00:18 -0800, Sean Bruno wrote: email message attachment, Forwarded message - Re: aic79xx+ASC39320A crash Forwarded Message From: Bjarne Thomsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sean Bruno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: aic79xx+ASC39320A crash Date: Mon, 01

Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: sbp2: lower block queue alignment requirement

2007-01-15 Thread Kristian Høgsberg
On 1/14/07, Stefan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 14 Jan, James Bottomley wrote: The block layer currently provides sector (512) byte alignment guarantees. However, there has been talk in SCSI of reducing that to word (4) since that's what most intelligent PCI controllers can cope

Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: sbp2: lower block queue alignment requirement

2007-01-15 Thread Mike Christie
Kristian Høgsberg wrote: On 1/14/07, Stefan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 14 Jan, James Bottomley wrote: The block layer currently provides sector (512) byte alignment guarantees. However, there has been talk in SCSI of reducing that to word (4) since that's what most intelligent

Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: sbp2: lower block queue alignment requirement

2007-01-15 Thread Stefan Richter
On 15 Jan, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: On 1/14/07, Stefan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, thanks. I will keep the explicit setting of the mask then. I actually think that everything should work just fine with 4 bytes alignment, but the SBP-2 spec mentiones 8 bytes alignment for the S/G

Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: sbp2: remove bogus emulated host flag

2007-01-15 Thread Douglas Gilbert
Kristian Høgsberg wrote: On 1/14/07, Stefan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is no emulation going on here. ... - .emulated= 1, Not sure what this flag does, but I copied it over to fw-sbp2.c. If it's bogus, I guess we should drop it from fw-sbp2.c too.

Re: Adaptect 9405w: What is the best solution?

2007-01-15 Thread Darrick J. Wong
Tarjei Huse wrote: Duh! Thanks :-) After doing as you suggested, and running make oldconfig using the configuration from Ubuntu Dapper (2.6.15-23-server) and the stock Ubuntu Edgy I get the same error when booting the kernel: PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at e is not E820-reserved

Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: sbp2: lower block queue alignment requirement

2007-01-15 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 21:02 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: By the way, is there a way to ask the SCSI stack to limit the size of the entries in the scatterlist to 64k? This would greatly simplify the conversion to SBP-2 page tables, since this is the maximum size these can hold. Douglas

Re: [PATCH] adjust use of unplug in elevator code

2007-01-15 Thread Jens Axboe
On Mon, Jan 15 2007, Linas Vepstas wrote: Hi Chris, Jens, Can you look at this, and push upstream if this looks reasonable to you? It fixes a bug I've been tripping over. --linas A flag was recently added to the elevator code to avoid performing an unplug when reuests are being