Question for Marcelo

Question for Marcelo

[Walt H]

Hi Marcelo,

I was just wondering if support for the Adaptec 79xx had been added to 
2.4.21-pre? I have a server with the dual channel 7902 support on board, 
that so far appears to be working OK. It's using 2.4.20 with the driver 
patched in from Adaptec's site. I found an earlier mail from you stating 
that it would be added during the 2.4.20-pre cycle. Are there problems 
with the driver I should be aware of? Thanks,

-Walt

PS. Please CC me in any replies, as I'm not subscribed to the list. Thanks.

Re: Question for Marcelo

[Samuel Flory]

Walt H wrote:

> Hi Marcelo,
>
> I was just wondering if support for the Adaptec 79xx had been added to 
> 2.4.21-pre? I have a server with the dual channel 7902 support on 
> board, that so far appears to be working OK. It's using 2.4.20 with 
> the driver patched in from Adaptec's site. I found an earlier mail 
> from you stating that it would be added during the 2.4.20-pre cycle. 
> Are there problems with the driver I should be aware of? Thanks,
>
> -Walt
>
> PS. Please CC me in any replies, as I'm not subscribed to the list. 
> Thanks.

  I believe that he would prefer that it get tested in the ac tree 1st. 
 Alan seemed receptive to including it, but he's not doing much with the 
2.4 ac kernel any more.

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104106449418263&w=2


PS- All you really need to do to update the driver is delete 
drivers/scsi/aic7xxx, and replace it with the newer driver from Gibbs 
site.  Recompile and you are done.
http://people.freebsd.org/~gibbs/linux/SRC/
aic79xx-linux-2.4-20021230-tar.gz

-- 
There is no such thing as obsolete hardware.
Merely hardware that other people don't want.
(The Second Rule of Hardware Acquisition)
Sam Flory  <sflory@rackable.com>

Re: Question for Marcelo

[Alan Cox]

On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 02:34, Samuel Flory wrote:
>   I believe that he would prefer that it get tested in the ac tree 1st. 
>  Alan seemed receptive to including it, but he's not doing much with the 
> 2.4 ac kernel any more.
> 

I've been working on merging a lot of stuff with Marcelo and cleaning up the
other changes. 2.4.21pre-ac should be out today, and its a lot smaller than
before as Marcelo as almost all the apic stuff, IDE updates etc. I've also
dropped rmap out for now

Re: Question for Marcelo

[Tomas Szepe]

> [alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk]
> 
> I've also dropped rmap out for now.

Hmm, what for?

-- 
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>

Re: Question for Marcelo

[Alan Cox]

On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 13:19, Tomas Szepe wrote:
> > [alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk]
> > 
> > I've also dropped rmap out for now.
> 
> Hmm, what for?

15a wasnt working very well, the base VM isn't too bad now and its
a _lot_ easier to do merging with Marcelo without rmap. The other
related bits are seperated out but present (vm overcommit handling,
fixed shmem, removepage callback)

Re: Question for Marcelo

[Paul P Komkoff Jr]

Replying to Alan Cox:
> 15a wasnt working very well, the base VM isn't too bad now and its

hmm, 15b? I have some
ftp://stingr.net/pub/l/rmap15b-for-2.4.20-ac2.gz

works for me here.

> a _lot_ easier to do merging with Marcelo without rmap. The other
> related bits are seperated out but present (vm overcommit handling,
> fixed shmem, removepage callback)

*sigh*

-- 
Paul P 'Stingray' Komkoff Jr /// (icq)23200764 /// (http)stingr.net
 This message represents the official view of the voices in my head

Re: Question for Marcelo

[Samuel Flory]

Alan Cox wrote:

>On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 02:34, Samuel Flory wrote:
>  
>
>>  I believe that he would prefer that it get tested in the ac tree 1st. 
>> Alan seemed receptive to including it, but he's not doing much with the 
>>2.4 ac kernel any more.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>I've been working on merging a lot of stuff with Marcelo and cleaning up the
>other changes. 2.4.21pre-ac should be out today, and its a lot smaller than
>before as Marcelo as almost all the apic stuff, IDE updates etc. I've also
>dropped rmap out for now
>

  Sorry if that came out like you were slacking off.  I know 2.5 and ide 
is taking up most of your time.

-- 
There is no such thing as obsolete hardware.
Merely hardware that other people don't want.
(The Second Rule of Hardware Acquisition)
Sam Flory  <sflory@rackable.com>