Hi Joerg,
It looks like this problem is NOT a bug with the SCSI aic7xxx driver
after all. I can duplicate this BUG very easily with other hardware.
Simply removing a driver module (whether it its self, has actually used
any of the DMA API or not) that is sitting on the same pci bus as a card
On 03/23/2015 11:03 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 02:36:19PM -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote:
It looks like this problem is NOT a bug with the SCSI aic7xxx driver
after all. I can duplicate this BUG very easily with other hardware.
Simply removing a driver module
On 03/25/2015 11:13 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Hi again,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 02:59:37PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 07:57:49AM -0400, Mark Hounschell wrote:
I'll be happy to test it.
Okay, here you go:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git
Hi Joerg,
On 03/26/2015 08:45 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:36:34PM -0400, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>> BTW, so far the first 2 patches are working well. I was going to
>> wait until the end of the day to report but so far I have been
>> unable to produ
On 03/26/2015 11:52 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:58:15AM -0400, Mark Hounschell wrote:
Sorry but CMA was still badly broken. I have a patch below that works.
In which way is it broken? What happens when you try to allocate memory
with dma_alloc_coherent?
I
linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
>
> The correct word should be "invalid," in spite of
> the fact that the SCSI committee used invalid syntax.
>
> Alan is right. There is nothing illegal in the kernel
> and if there is, it must be removed as soon as it
> is discovered!
>
il·le·gal (-lgl)
adj.
1
appreciated
Regards
Mark Hounschell
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 10:15 -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>> I seem to have run into some sort of regression in the SG_IO interface of
>> 2.6.24.2.
>> I have an application that up until 2.6.24 worked fine. The 2.6.23.16 kernel
>> works fin
Mark Hounschell wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 10:15 -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>> I seem to have run into some sort of regression in the SG_IO interface of
>>> 2.6.24.2.
>>> I have an application that up until 2.6.24 worked f
Mike Christie wrote:
> Mike Christie wrote:
>> Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>> I seem to have run into some sort of regression in the SG_IO
>>> interface of 2.6.24.2. I have an application that up until 2.6.24
>>> worked fine. The 2.6.23.16 kernel works fine.
>
Mark Hounschell wrote:
> Mike Christie wrote:
>> Mike Christie wrote:
>>> Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>>> I seem to have run into some sort of regression in the SG_IO
>>>> interface of 2.6.24.2. I have an application that up until 2.6.24
>>
Mike Christie wrote:
> Mark Hounschell wrote:
>> Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>> Mike Christie wrote:
>>>> Mike Christie wrote:
>>>>> Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>>>>> I seem to have run into some sort of regression in the SG_IO
>>&
12 matches
Mail list logo
