From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 10374] New: sym53c8xx: weird behavior with udev Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:14:14 -0500 Message-ID: <1207084454.3100.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080401011518.eb683cff.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1207059115.3100.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080401210521.abbb443c.seraph@xs4all.nl> <1207081169.3100.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080401225717.7d936f91.seraph@xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from accolon.hansenpartnership.com ([76.243.235.52]:37023 "EHLO accolon.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761936AbYDAVOT (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 17:14:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080401225717.7d936f91.seraph@xs4all.nl> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jos van der Ende Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 22:57 +0200, Jos van der Ende wrote: > On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:19:29 -0500 > James Bottomley wrote: > > > That's odd ... it's behaving like a resource conflict. However, the > > ports and interrupt trace didn't betray anything. What does lspci -vv > > say for each of the devices? > > Output from lspci -vv attached. Thanks ... unfortunately looks normal too. The gem has a single memory region; the sym2 has 2 mem and one IO region, all of which show up in the /proc/iomem|ports. > > Also, if you remove the sym2 module in the > > problem case, does the sungem come back to life? > > No, once it is hosed it stays hosed until the next boot. Fiddling with the wrong ioports maybe? Yes ... that's what I guess. Just as one last grasp at a straw, is there any difference in /proc/iomem or /proc/ioports for the working case (sungem loaded first followed by sym2)? > > I'm afraid I can't see anything relevant looking over the sym2 changes, > > so you might need to bisect this to identify the culprit. > > Working on that, but it is a hassle as this bitty-box needs some time to compile a kernel. 2.6.23-rc1 didn't boot, for starters. Sorry ... can't think of much else that will help. James