On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 22:22 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:49:30 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:57:50 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
Yes, this problem has been around forever AFAIK. You didn't add
to it.
Do we need to
On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 10:20 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
For DMA transfers ... which is where you give the device a bus physical
address and a length and tell it to go off and perform the transfer on
its own, you need to use the dma_map_ functions.
For PIO transfers, which are usually
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:39:54 -0500 James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 22:22 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:49:30 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:57:50 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
Yes, this problem has been
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:49:30 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:57:50 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
Yes, this problem has been around forever AFAIK. You didn't add
to it.
Do we need to file a bug report in Bugzilla or something, so people have a
Randy Dunlap wrote:
I prefer either of the !HIGHMEM or slave_alloc changes to adding
a BUG_ON(). However, the SCSI people likely won't want to use the
slave_alloc() change because then the driver may never get fixed.
(Of course, it hasn't got fixed with the BUG happening either.)
Anyway,
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:12:19 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
I prefer either of the !HIGHMEM or slave_alloc changes to adding
a BUG_ON(). However, the SCSI people likely won't want to use the
slave_alloc() change because then the driver may never get fixed.
(Of course, it
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:43:35 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:58:18 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:33:20 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
Hi,
I don't see the reset problem after applying this patch, but I'm
still seeing an Oops in
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:04:45 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:43:35 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:58:18 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:33:20 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
Hi,
I don't see the reset problem
Randy Dunlap wrote:
Yes, this problem has been around forever AFAIK. You didn't add
to it.
Do we need to file a bug report in Bugzilla or something, so people have a
documentation of the work-around, until it is fixed?
I think that for now I will wrap it up as it is. Could you send me the
On 7/18/07, Boaz Harrosh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:20 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
If you could do some testing it is grate. The first 3 patches do not
need scsi-misc specifically. Any post 2.6.20 tree will do. The last patch
could be done together
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:29:24 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:20 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
If you could do some testing it is grate. The first 3 patches do not
need scsi-misc specifically. Any post 2.6.20 tree will do. The last patch
could be
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:33:20 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:29:24 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:20 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
If you could do some testing it is grate. The first 3 patches do not
need scsi-misc
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:58:18 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:33:20 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:29:24 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:20 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
If you could do some testing it
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:43:35 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:58:18 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:33:20 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:29:24 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:20
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:22:20 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
If you could do some testing it is grate. The first 3 patches do not
need scsi-misc specifically. Any post 2.6.20 tree will do. The last patch
could be done together with attached patch on any 2.6.22 tree.
(Apply attached patch anywhere
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:42:07 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote:
In motivation for the !use_sg cleanup and use of accessors
I needed to do some restructuring of the aha152x.c driver.
I have tried to be as careful as I could, but with out
the hardware for testing, it is hard. Christoph and James
You
16 matches
Mail list logo
