Re: sata_nv + SMP = broken?

[Vladimir Lazarenko <vlad@lazarenko.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1318 bytes --]

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wednesday, 26 of October 2005 03:03, Vladimir Lazarenko wrote:
> }-- snip --{
> 
>>Let me know if i need to test anything or you want more info.
> 
> 
> Could you please create a Bugzilla entry for that, and put all of the
> information you think can be relevant in there (including
> .config(s), the output(s) of dmesg, the contents of /proc/interrupts
> etc. for failing configurations)?


Actually, yesterday I was too tired to post a followup, but I'll surely 
do this now, since at 7am I think I was able to finally find a solution.

As a last step of my playaround, I took 2.6.14-rc5 and decided to give 
it a go. To my amazement - the box booted up WITH apic, the test raid 
resync went smoothly, and the box lives till this moment! :)

Happy-happy joy-joy. In the notable differences I saw libata going from 
0.10 to 0.12, and sata_nv from 0.6 to 0.9 (actually 0.8 was the version, 
I guess Jeff forgot to bump the version, since comment says "0.9 Fixed 
the bug introduced with MCPxx support", but version defined is still 0.8).

Oh man, I can't believe I'm through with this.

Thanks everyone very very much for bearing with me all this time.

I suppose Bugzilla entry won't be necessary anymore? Or do you still 
want that for statistical purposes?

Regards,
Vladimir

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3412 bytes --]