Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-21 Thread John Summerfield
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] If we can truly go for label based mouting > and lilo'ing this would solve the problem. Anybody doing this? Red hat Linux 7.0. -- Cheers John Summerfield http://www2.ami.com.au/ for OS/2 & linux information. Configuration, networking, c

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-18 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 10:53:16PM +0200, Matti Aarnio wrote: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 09:59:06AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ... > > > Yes. PCI-based drivers will most likely use bus order since the kernel > > > provides facilities to do this easily. For a single driver driving > > > mul

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-18 Thread Matti Aarnio
On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 09:59:06AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... > > Yes. PCI-based drivers will most likely use bus order since the kernel > > provides facilities to do this easily. For a single driver driving > > multiple cards on multiple bus types, who knows. > > Multiple bus types...

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-18 Thread Peter Samuelson
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Multiple bus types... Compaq server with PCI and EISA, for example? > IIRC the EISA bus is bridged onto one of the PCI busses. Perhaps a > breadth-first scan; PCI busses first, then bridged devices on PCI, > then internal non-PCI busses, then external busses. No, bridging

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-18 Thread idalton
On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 06:50:12AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [James Bottomley] > > The fundamental problem that we all agree on is that SCSI devices are > > detected in the order that the mid-layer hosts.c file calls their > > detect routines. > > That was yesterday. Today they are detecte

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-18 Thread Andries . Brouwer
Matti Aarnio writes: > And the partitions are PHYSICAL partition numbers, > not some logical ones. That is very interesting. Can you explain to me what physical partition numbers are? Andries - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to [EM

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-18 Thread Peter Samuelson
[James Bottomley] > The fundamental problem that we all agree on is that SCSI devices are > detected in the order that the mid-layer hosts.c file calls their > detect routines. That was yesterday. Today they are detected in the order they are linked into the kernel, cf. the Makefile. But yes, t

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Dr. Kelsey Hudson
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001, Werner Almesberger wrote: > "no", because you don't have to do it in the kernel. You can mount by > uuid or label. For the root FS, you do this from an initrd. Problem > solved. > > The only cases when you really need to know the name of a disk is when > - doing disk-level m

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Werner Almesberger
Matti Aarnio wrote: > 2.4.0 with devfs mounted at boot time into /dev/ Or /proc/partitions, which - according to the mount(8) man page - has been around since 2.1.116. So we're not exactly talking crazy upgrade paths here. > This new style (which contains, hopefully, physical PCI location) >

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Matti Aarnio
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 08:22:22PM +0100, Werner Almesberger wrote: > The only cases when you really need to know the name of a disk is when > - doing disk-level management, e.g. partitioning or creating file >systems (*) > - adding a swap partition (sigh) > - telling your boot loader where

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Werner Almesberger
[ Ccs trimmed ] Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote: > *single* scsi adapter in their systems? do we need to bloat the kernel > with automatic things like this? no... i think it is handled fine the way "no", because you don't have to do it in the kernel. You can mount by uuid or label. For the root FS, you

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Douglas Gilbert
Michael Meissner wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 12:32:05AM +0100, J . A . Magallon wrote: > > If that is your idea of the average user... You're a system administrator, > > you can have tons of scsi cards in your system if you want. > > > > You want to make things SOOO easy for a 'dummy' user

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread James Bottomley
OK, what about a compromise. The fundamental problem that we all agree on is that SCSI devices are detected in the order that the mid-layer hosts.c file calls their detect routines. Further, for multiple cards of the same type, the detection order is up to the individual driver. A different

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Mike Porter
> however, this brings up an interesting question: what happens if two disks > (presumably from two different machines) have the same disk label? what > happens then? for instance, i have several linux machines both at my > workplace and my home. if for some reason one of these machines dies due >

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-17 Thread Ishikawa
"J . A . Magallon" wrote: > > > Average users you are targetting with that automagical > card detection even do not know there are SCSI and IDE disks. They just > want a 30Gb ide disk to install linux and play. If they involve with SCSI > and ID numbers and multiple cards and so on they can read

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Michael Meissner
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 12:32:05AM +0100, J . A . Magallon wrote: > If that is your idea of the average user... You're a system administrator, > you can have tons of scsi cards in your system if you want. > > You want to make things SOOO easy for a 'dummy' user, and that user will never > use t

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Dr. Kelsey Hudson
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001, J . A . Magallon wrote: > You want to make things SOOO easy for a 'dummy' user, and that user will never > use them. The average user you are targetting says: 'daddy, buy me a PC to > run Quake and do my school jobs' or 'please, dear vendor, I want a PC to > do my housekeepi

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Dr. Kelsey Hudson
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Michael Meissner wrote: > > you're forgetting that in /etc/lilo.conf there is a directive called > > 'append='... all the user has to do is merely add > > 'append="scsihosts=whatever,whatever"' into their config file and rerun > > lilo. problem solved > > That's assuming you

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread J . A . Magallon
On 2001.01.16 Michael Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 12:01:12PM -0800, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: .. > > besides, how many 'end-users' do you know of that will have multiple scsi > > adapters in one system? how many end-users -period-

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread John Summerfield
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Can the linux kernel be changed in such a way that kernel will look > for the actual boot drive and re-order the drives so that mounting can > go on in the right order. > we need some kind of signature being written in the drive, which the > kernel will use for determi

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Andreas Dilger
Kelsey Hudson writes: > however, this brings up an interesting question: what happens if two disks > (presumably from two different machines) have the same disk label? what > happens then? for instance, i have several linux machines both at my > workplace and my home. if for some reason one of the

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> Of course that would be better. The only complaint I have with such a > system is that of backwards compatibility...as long as the legacy device > names are still supported i would have no problem with it at all. > > however, this brings up an interesting question: what happens if two disks >

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Michael Meissner
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 12:01:12PM -0800, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > > > > This is due to the fixed ordering of the scsi drivers. You can change the > > > order of the scsi hosts with the "scsihosts" kernel parameter. See > > > linux/drivers/scsi

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Dr. Kelsey Hudson
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] Dont you think that mounting and booting > based on disk label names is better, then relying on device nodes which can > change when a new card is added?. The existing patch for 2.2.xx is quite > small and it does no

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> you're forgetting that in /etc/lilo.conf there is a directive called > 'append='... all the user has to do is merely add > 'append="scsihosts=whatever,whatever"' into their config file and rerun > lilo. problem solved > > besides, how many 'end-users' do you know of that will have multiple scsi

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Dr. Kelsey Hudson
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > > This is due to the fixed ordering of the scsi drivers. You can change the > > order of the scsi hosts with the "scsihosts" kernel parameter. See > > linux/drivers/scsi/scsi.c > [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] I think it would be a nice idea if we

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Malahal Rao Naineni
Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > > Hi, > I have one issue which requires fix from the linux kernel. > Initially i put a SCSI controller and install the OS on the drive connected > to it. After installing the OS (on sda), the customer puts another SCSI > controller. The BIOS for the first controller

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Eddie Williams
> Why does the end-user have to compile the kernel? Most distributions > provide a kernel with no SCSI drivers in it, but use an initrd to get > the root SCSI driver in (man mkinitrd on any Redhat box). Just > distribute all SCSI drivers as modules and you won't have any problems. > That is n

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Brian Gerst
Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > > > When the cards are of different make the order is solely dependent on > > the order that the drivers are initialized in the kernel. If you have > > modules enabled, only build the driver for your root device into the > > kernel image and have the other modular.

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> Why is this a SCSI ML problem? The problem is that the OS can't figure > out > where to mount root from. Sounds like an OS problem. > I think the file system label is the leading candidate to solve this. One > > really does not care if the root disk is called /dev/sda or /dev/fred. > All

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> The scsi host numbers will be allocated to the HBAs in > the order shown starting at 0. This method does not > distinguish between the two advansys controllers, luckily > swapping their positions on the PCI bus does. [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] Just think an end-user fuguring out this A

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Eddie Williams
Why is this a SCSI ML problem? The problem is that the OS can't figure out where to mount root from. Sounds like an OS problem. I think the file system label is the leading candidate to solve this. One really does not care if the root disk is called /dev/sda or /dev/fred. All one cares is

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> > Is someone handling this already? > > "mount by uuid"? > > Amiga's Rigid Disk Block? [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] Something like this is better. The problem is where do we store this info. Last sector is one of the options. Does anyone know where NT stores this info? - To unsubscribe

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Douglas Gilbert
Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > > Hi, > I have one issue which requires fix from the linux kernel. > Initially i put a SCSI controller and install the OS on the drive connected > to it. After installing the OS (on sda), the customer puts another SCSI > controller. The BIOS for the first controller

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> This is due to the fixed ordering of the scsi drivers. You can change the > order of the scsi hosts with the "scsihosts" kernel parameter. See > linux/drivers/scsi/scsi.c [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] I think it would be a nice idea if we can make this process automatic , with out user typing

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Matthias Andree
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > we need some kind of signature being written in the drive, which the kernel > will use for determining the boot drive and later re-order drives, if > required. > > Is someone handling this already? "mount by uuid"? Amiga's Rigid Disk Block?

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> When the cards are of different make the order is solely dependent on > the order that the drivers are initialized in the kernel. If you have > modules enabled, only build the driver for your root device into the > kernel image and have the other modular. This lets you control the > initializa

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> In article <1355693A51C0D211B55A00105ACCFE64E9518C@ATL_MS1> you wrote: > > > we need some kind of signature being written in the drive, which the > kernel > > will use for determining the boot drive and later re-order drives, if > > required. > > Like the ext2 labels? (man e2label) [Ve

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Florent Cueto
ot;Venkatesh Ramamurthy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Alan Cox'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 5:19 PM Subject: RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order? > > It should be pos

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Brian Gerst
Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > > > It should be possible to read the BIOS setting for this option and > > behave accordingly. Please give full details of how to read and interpret > > the information stored in the CMOS for all versions of AMI BIOS, and I'll > > take a look at this. > [Venk

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> Are your two SCSI controllers handled by the same driver or through > different ones? If they're handled by two separate drivers, simply > build that one you need to boot off into the kernel and build the > other one as a module. [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] Different ones with mutiple contro

RE: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Venkatesh Ramamurthy
> It should be possible to read the BIOS setting for this option and > behave accordingly. Please give full details of how to read and interpret > the information stored in the CMOS for all versions of AMI BIOS, and I'll > take a look at this. [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] When i meant BIOS sett

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 10:49:05AM -0500, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote: > Hi, > I have one issue which requires fix from the linux kernel. > Initially i put a SCSI controller and install the OS on the drive connected > to it. After installing the OS (on sda), the customer puts another SCSI > contro

Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order?

2001-01-16 Thread David Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > we need some kind of signature being written in the drive, which the > kernel will use for determining the boot drive and later re-order > drives, if required. > Is someone handling this already? It should be possible to read the BIOS setting for this option and beha