Linux-Hardware Digest #641, Volume #14 Tue, 17 Apr 01 22:13:10 EDT
Contents:
AIC-7899W support in Red Hat? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Maxtor 98196H8 Hard disk size wrong (Jon Williams)
Re: Reach maximum mount count? (Hartmann Schaffer)
Re: capacity of exabyte 8200? (Joshua Baker-LePain)
need good linux athalon (tbird) motherboard.. ("teknogeek")
Re: Switchboxes for keyboard, mice, video? (Keith R. Williams)
Re: Re-Partition ("teknogeek")
Re: AIC-7899W support in Red Hat? (J Hayward)
Re: ide-scsi problem? ("teknogeek")
Re: Re-Partition ("Brett I. Holcomb")
Re: need good linux athalon (tbird) motherboard.. ("Giles C Hjort-Tyson")
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
unicat gets bored (Re: Microsoft gets hard) (Franek)
nvidia Open GL and 2.4.x kernel ("Helmut Steinwender")
Re: Microsoft gets hard (Franek)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Franek)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Franek)
Re: Red Hat 7.1 (kernel 2.4.2) w/ VIA chipset ("Giles C Hjort-Tyson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: AIC-7899W support in Red Hat?
Date: 17 Apr 2001 16:12:36 PDT
I can't find anything that says one way or the other for Red Hat. I tried to
search the web fairly thoroughly.
Is this supported by Red Hat and where can I find out more info?
--
Manatee
------------------------------
From: Jon Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Maxtor 98196H8 Hard disk size wrong
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:30:12 -0400
Reply-To: Jonathan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
append = "idebus=66 ide0=ata66 ide1=ata66 hdd=158816,255,16"
still give me a ~33 gig partition........
root@moxie:/home/xm# sfdisk -g /dev/hdd
/dev/hdd: 16190 cylinders, 255 heads, 16 sectors/track
i tired to override it using sfdisk but i got nasty errors during
mkreiserfs
hdd: write_intr: error=0x10 { SectorIdNotFound }, LBAsect=98567154,
sector=9856614
Any ideas?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > I have a box with an FIC FD-11 (with via ide) mobo that can't seem to get
> > my ~80 gig disk to detect bigger than ~33 gigs.
>
> the bios is pretty much irrelevant; you can force Linux to use
> any geometry you like (and because of LBA, as long as the total
> number of sectors is OK, any geometry will do.)
>
/* Jon Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Running OpenVMS and proud of it! *
* http://mail.rochester.edu/~jw002j/ */
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE63NIjzRyE+jEjEMARArptAJ96mlSi46wY4EOAjGJgmrK/D7O1jwCeIiOt
uUvIF/6/uYyEheevHFt1bxE=
=dmc3
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hartmann Schaffer)
Subject: Re: Reach maximum mount count?
Date: 17 Apr 2001 20:42:26 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jarmo Uusi-Maahi wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>maybe this question feels silly, but I'm new with Linux and
>I ask it anyway:
>
>When I boot my RH7 I saw this message:
>"Reach maximum mount count, check forced"
>
>(I have seen this message only 2 or 3 times in week.)
>
>What this mean? Is there something wrong? And should I
>be worry?
with big disks, checking the file systems on bootup takes quite a while.
so most file systems set a flag on shutdown to indicate that the fs was
unmounted cleanly. on bootup, this flag is checked and the filesystem
check is skipped if it is set (if the last time your system ran it stopped
because of a power failure, it will check the filesystems).
since over time some problems can accumulate in a file system, most file
systems do the check periodically when the system has been rebooted often
enough. it is just a precaution (i never had problems on those checks)
no reaso to worry. the system designer was just cautious (though 2 or 3
times a week seems a little bit high. how often do you reboot?)
--
hs
================================================================
"The cheapest pride is national pride. I demonstrates the lack of
characteristics and achievements you can be proud of. The worst loser
can have national pride" - Schopenhauer
------------------------------
From: Joshua Baker-LePain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: capacity of exabyte 8200?
Date: 18 Apr 2001 00:51:53 GMT
In comp.os.linux.hardware Lupei Zhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some one mentioned "mt" command. I couldn't find it on my RH7.0. which
> package provides it?
mt-st
If your drive is an 8205, and thus supports hardware compression, you
can put it into compressed mode via 'mt -f /dev/nst0 density 0x90'. You
can check what mode it is in via 'mt -f /dev/nst0 status'.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
------------------------------
From: "teknogeek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: need good linux athalon (tbird) motherboard..
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:54:53 GMT
i'm looking to upgrade my processor/mb, and am planning on getting an amd
thunderbird processor. are there any recommendations for good inexpensive
motherboards which work excellent under linux?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Subject: Re: Switchboxes for keyboard, mice, video?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:56:47 GMT
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:00:45, Milton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:19:36 GMT, Joeri Sebrechts
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >You sound like a man in need of an original ibm ps/2 keyboard. They're
> >almost indestructible.
> >Go find 'em, they're cheap secondhand, and often in near mint condition.
> >If you can stand the clicking sound the keys make, you'll be more than
> >happy. Regular keyboards (like cherry's and so on) suck in comparison to
> >the superb tactile feedback of the ibm keyboard. The ibm tells you when
> >you've pressed the key far enough with a very satisfying click.
> >Plus, if you get a burglar, you can grab something close to you to knock
> >him out with this time, because these keyboard weigh a LOT.
> >I'm typing this e-mail on one right now, and as far as I can tell the
> >only way I can do better than this is spend as much on another keyboard
> >as I would spend on a TV.
>
> I gotta agree with this 100%
> I'm typing this, on my trusty old Part # J2 Model M.
No question!
> God damn, they don't make em like they used to.
> Date 22SEPT86
Mine is a new one. It's 25SEP89. It came off my PS/2
30/286. I collect these things at work. I can't stand
wimpy keyboards. The buckling-sping keyboards are
unsurpassed! Rubber-dome - blech!
> Except for the cigarette burn on the key T , as good as new.
> ( Yeah I know you shouldn't smoke or drink coffee while computing, but I
> do both, and even spilt coffee on the keyboard a couple of times too)
Got coffee stains on one at work. It's a mess. About once
every other year I pull the keycaps off and pluck the debris
(mostly hair) out and wash the keycaps in Windex. It
restores the keyboard to new.
> The only computer component, I really got my moneys worth outta.
> And it looks like it's good to go for another 15 years.
>
> My first true love, I'm gonna miss her dearly when she finally goes.
That's why I collect 'em! I've pulled many from the
hallways. ...though I've never had one fail. I've had a
cable fail, but not the keyboard.
----
Keith
------------------------------
From: "teknogeek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Re-Partition
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:57:51 GMT
partitionmagic is excellent, but it's probably around 40$. there's also a
gnu partition package that should work with MS dos and ext2 partitions, but
the name escapes me. try a search on gnu.org or tucows websites.
dsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have Linux installed, but now I need to install Windows as well.
> Unfortunately I do not know how to re-partition to accomplish this task.
>
>
>
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> David..
>
------------------------------
From: J Hayward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AIC-7899W support in Red Hat?
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:56:49 -0700
Hello,
Did you try RedHat's hardware compatibility list
http://hardware.redhat.com/redhatready/cgi-bin/us/db-hcl.cgi
Regards,
Jim H
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I can't find anything that says one way or the other for Red Hat. I tried
> to search the web fairly thoroughly.
>
> Is this supported by Red Hat and where can I find out more info?
>
>
------------------------------
From: "teknogeek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ide-scsi problem?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:02:27 GMT
I totally agree, i've seen lock-ups where thescsi bus would get corrupted
when duplicating music cd's, but never when doing data cd's via command
line. Using xcdroast, and doing track at once as oppose to disk at once
seemed to fix the problem. after the lockup, trying "cdrecord -scanbus"
would give lots of garbage, and the reset didn't work either, only solution
was to re-boot. i'm using either the 2.4.2 or 2.4.3 kernel...
Julian Gough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I've 'solved' the problem, if you have anything similar please read on,
> I have seen many problems related on newsgroups but no real answer.
> This is my hypothesis.
>
> 1) There is a bug in ide-scsi. I have no idea what it is but it
> sometimes causes lockups.
> 1a) The only way to cure these lockups is a reboot, as ide-scsi is set
> up at a very low lovel at boot time passed to the boot loader as an
> option.
> 2) Using cdrecord <= 1.6.1 does not encounter this problem,
> presumably it does not use certain scsi commands, or combinations /
> variations of.
> 3) Using more up to date versions of cdrecord cause lockups when using
> the '-pad' option, at the end of recording when fixating (or at the end
> of writing the TOC).
> 4) This is not a bug in cdrecord, but a bug in ide-scsi, hence
> difficulty in finding a problem with the upgrade of cdrecord (with the
> '- pad' option thrown in for good measure).
>
> I could be wrong, but this is consistent with my experiences, and with
> the experiences of others I've read about on newsgroups.
>
> Julian
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~
> Julian Gough
> Structural Studies Division
> MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology
> Hills Road
> Cambridge CB2 2QH
> England
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/genomes/julian/julian.html
> Home Fax/Tel: +44-(0)1223-740705
> Work Fax: +44-(0)1223-213556
> Work Tel: +44-(0)1223-402479
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Brett I. Holcomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Re-Partition
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 20:05:28 -0500
Check out Ranish partition manager - that's free and good. I don't have the
address handy.
--
Brett I. Holcomb
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AKA Grunt<><
"teknogeek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:jE5D6.111366$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> partitionmagic is excellent, but it's probably around 40$. there's also a
> gnu partition package that should work with MS dos and ext2 partitions,
but
> the name escapes me. try a search on gnu.org or tucows websites.
>
> dsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I have Linux installed, but now I need to install Windows as well.
> > Unfortunately I do not know how to re-partition to accomplish this task.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you in advance.
> >
> > David..
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Giles C Hjort-Tyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: need good linux athalon (tbird) motherboard..
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:27:24 GMT
I use an Asus A7V and it works great. You will need to use a 2.4.x
kernel for support of the onboard promise controller, if you use an older
kernel you can still run linux fine from a hard disk on the standard VIA
ATA/66 controller.
In article <xB5D6.111364$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "teknogeek"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'm looking to upgrade my processor/mb, and am planning on getting an
> amd thunderbird processor. are there any recommendations for good
> inexpensive motherboards which work excellent under linux?
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:28:40 GMT
I see the same thing. But NT is not often used where it could, due
either a crash or lack of timeliness, do any damage to the work process.
I have seem it tried several times. One crash shut down a process line
permitting liquid nylon to harden in pipes and valves. 15 minutes off
line cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Another caused
disruption of a refinery operation. It took several days to get the
plant cleaned up and back on line.
I build SCADA system also. Several US cities are running systems I
designed. But if the operator displays fail, the A-B PLCs and
specialized computers will still run everything OK. The operator, just
has to run around to check local controls like he did before the
computers were installed.
Jeff McWilliams wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Lyttle wrote:
> >Monte Milanuk wrote:
> >>
> >> Monte
> >I don't understand your comment. "SoftPLC" does run on x86 type
> >computers, but no factory I know is going to use consumer class PCs
> >running Windows. Think what could happen in your steel mill if a BSOD
> >stops everything in the middle of a pour. There are lots of PC type
> >modules for factories. PC-104 is just one standard form factor for
> >industrial use. There are lots of industrial OS around that can handle
> >industrial operations. Linux is just one of several.
>
> Just to add my two cents here. I do software application development for
> the industrial automation sector here in the Detroit, Michigan area.
>
> The acceptance of Windows NT as a platform to run software on the plant floor
> has become more accepted in recent years than you think. Mind you,
> most of the uses of the NT platform based systems are not necessarily
> critical to the production process per se. Rockwell Automation does
> produce the SoftLogix Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) software
> that almost exactly works like a standard Allen-Bradley PLC5 but runs
> under Windows NT. However, most of the automation integration I've seen
> being done at Fanuc Robotics (where I do a lot of work) still uses 99.99%
> Allen-Bradley PLC5 and ControlLogix 5500 series PLC's. And of course,
> the robots themselves are still run with proprietary OSs.
>
> However, a really important emerging area in industrial automation
> is to bring together Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
> functionality and begin merging this with a manufacturer's ERP systems
> (like BAAN) to push production schedules down to the floor, and to pull
> production, downtime, and maintenance information up.
>
> Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) is a big buzzword these days.
> Everybody wants to identify production bottlenecks and improve the
> OEE number.
>
> Rockwell Software (part of Rockwell Automation) has an entire line of
> plant automation software that is entirely NT based, including
> Plant Metrics, Historial, and RSSql. GE Fanuc's CIMPLICITY software
> is similar. This software is designed to gather data from mainly
> PLC's and store it in a database (e.g. MS SQL Server) and used to
> generate reports, including OEE.
>
> We've been writing custom SCADA packages that run under Windows NT
> for years. Even in a place as dirty as the Ford Woodhaven
> press plant I've worked on Dell Optiplex PC's running 24/7.
> This was not my idea,
> by the way. They do have failures. The standard Western Digital IDE
> hard drives in the Optiplex series typically last about 3 years before
> they begin to malfunction. CD-ROM drives die an early death as well.
> I've been suggesting using IDE RAID mirroring for about a year
> now but this particular automation customer just doesn't seem to be
> dedicated to improving their reliability.
>
> You wouldn't normally think of data gathering as being as critical
> as the second-to-second process control that's handled by the PLC's is.
> However, gathering accurate OEE information is becoming more imporant
> all the time. I've been working with one customer who is going to install
> a dedicated Windows NT 2-node cluster to guarantee that production data
> is always gathered. The Compaq CL-1850 is sitting on a bench at
> the office right now.
>
> Some other interesting things:
>
> Rockwell Automation provides a set of devices called PanelViews.
> These have typically been small embedded devices running QNX or some other
> embedded OS, with a small touch-screen face. Proprietary Rockwell
> software runs on the device providing simple (circle, square, text)
> indicators and push-buttons that help control plant automation.
> Their newest PanelViews are Windows CE based. These devices
> boot up into Windows CE, then immediately load a Citrix WinFrame client
> and attach to a Windows Terminal Server server. Using this method,
> they run a full copy of Rockwell Software's RSView32
> plant visualization and control software for Windows NT. The architecture
> requires a decidated Terminal Server box as well as a dedicated
> RSView server to drive the PanelViews.
>
> When it comes to PC hardware for the shop floor, I would MUCH rather
> go with some standard off the shelf hardware in a 4 or 5U rackmount
> "industrialized" enclosure and provides some additional cooling fans
> and air filters and configure them with redundant IDE RAID mirroring.
> This would go a long way toward improving upon the reliability of those
> Dells I see being used. It's not my decision, however. I'm primarily
> a C++ software developer, the guy sitting in the corner shaking his head
> when he hears some of these silly things being discussed.
>
> Jeff
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: unicat gets bored (Re: Microsoft gets hard)
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:29:33 GMT
Ah, quit trolling buddy. Windows isn't dying.
------------------------------
From: "Helmut Steinwender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: nvidia Open GL and 2.4.x kernel
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:30:11 GMT
Has anyone succeeded in compiling nvidia's kernel module for a 2.4.3 SMP
kernel? I am using Mandrake 8 Beta tried srpms and tarballs, fails due to
unresolved symbols, even with SYSINCLUDE.
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft gets hard
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:32:12 GMT
JS PL wrote:
> More than 6 million Linux developers! I think not. I submit that there are
> not even 6 million Linux USERS!!
Well, that's OK. It is quite possible that there are more linux programmers than linux
users.
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:33:15 GMT
Greg Cox wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > I thought that a few years ago, the U.S.Navy tried a computer
> > controlled battleship, and the computers ran Windows NT (probably 3.51
> > in those days), and it crashed so bad the ship had to be towed into
> > port. (I may not have the facts exactly correct, but it was pretty
> > much like this.) Maybe the computers were not exactly your
> > bargain-basement PCs, but the software must have been. If the U.S.Navy
> > is dumb enough to use Microsoftware in a battle-critical system, why
> > would not some private industry be just as dumb?
> >
> >
>
> The version of the story I heard was that the first ship of a new class
> of Navy ship was out testing a new ship's control system programmed
> using a custom database running on NT4 and the DB software crashed, not
> NT. I believe the story goes that the captain said in his report that
> the DB software crashed a couple of times and was successfully restarted
> but the ship was towed in on the third crash with the system left in its
> crashed state for later analysis by the developers...
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essentially the version that was posted here. The DB crash, iirc, was
due to the cook entering too many items in a dinner menu. This crashed
the DB, the DB took down NT. It got restarted without anyone knowing why
it crashed, the cook did it again. When it crashed, it took out
propulsion. On the third try, the Captain decided to call for a tow
until the problem could be solved.
One joke was that it should be intuitive that entering 4 entrees in the
dinner menu will shutdown the ships propulsion. The Navy fixed the
problem by making a new regulation prohibiting more than 3 entrees at a
meal.
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:42:53 GMT
Charles Lyttle wrote:
> However there are a number of manufacturers who make PC equals for the
> factory floor. They are much lower cost than traditional factory
> hardware, especially HP or Sun systems. These systems cost lots more
> than CompUSA trash, but still are cost effective, *IF* they have a good
> OS loaded. Linux does have competitors in this market, QNX being one.
> But the cost of a single BSOD is high enough to keep Windows out.
er... I've done some work on the "factory floor" and I've used different operating
systems. First (I'll probably be crucified now) linux crashes just as well as NT,
especially with some of the crap that's out there (of course it doesn't show blue on
screen <g>, maybe that makes it preferable.) Second, NT is used an *awful* lot in the
factory environment, and again, it's not that bad, no Sir, not at all. Lastly, whatever
application you're running that *must* not abend, you won't run either on NT or linux,
or
anything else of the kind. For critical real-time control none of these will do. QNX
will
do, as will some specialized systems like DCSs or PLCs. General-purpose boxes normally
run
user interfaces, data collection, recipe loading, this kind of things, not the RT
control.
This stuff can be rebooted relatively harmlessly.
The problems with NT have rather something to do with:
- cost of licensing and idiotic conditions with artificial limitations
- goddamned size of it (linux can be chopped up and configured *exactly* for that task
you
need)
- related to the previous: a potentially higher cost of hardware--sometimes it's
important.
> --
> Russ Lyttle
> "World Domination through Penguin Power"
> The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
> <http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:48:18 GMT
Nah, it's an urban legend. I can't remember the details, but they got some database
glitch
or something of this sort. Not related to NT, but to the program that ran on it. But
it's
such an tasty story that NT is so bad it even incapacitated the Navy ship that it's
impossible to disbelieve it--even though it's not true <G>. Well, that's the stuff what
urban legends are made of ! ;^)
------------------------------
From: "Giles C Hjort-Tyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Red Hat 7.1 (kernel 2.4.2) w/ VIA chipset
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 02:07:17 GMT
I have been running the 2.4.3 kernel for a couple days without problem,
and today I "upgraded" to the 2.4.2-2 kernel from redhat 7.1 So far all
is working fine, but ofcourse I have only been running for 6 hours now.
My motherboard is the asus A7V, which uses the Via KT133 chipset. My
hard disc is useing the via chipset's controller, not the ATA/100 promise
controller. It's an old 6gb seagate, which is running with DMA at ATA/33 speeds
fine, and getting about 8-9 MB/sec- which is what the drive should be
getting.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ian Pilcher"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quite a bit has been written lately about problems with VIA chipsets,
> and I'm trying to figure out if upgrading to Red Hat 7.1, with kernel
> 2.4.2 is going to cause me problems. Try as I might, I can't figure out
> exactly which VIA chips are having problems. Here is my configuration,
> which is running quite happily with Red Hat 7.0 (kernel 2.2.17):
> /dev/hda:
>
> Model=WDC WD300AB-00BPA1, FwRev=18.20D18, SerialNo=WD-WMA6W1562394
> Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec SpinMotCtl Fixed DTR>5Mbs
> FmtGapReq }
> RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=57600, SectSize=600, ECCbytes=40
> BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=2048kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
> CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=-66060037, LBA=yes, LBAsects=58633344
> IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120} PIO
> modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
> DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 *udma4 udma5
>
> multcount = 16 (on)
> I/O support = 1 (32-bit)
> unmaskirq = 1 (on)
> using_dma = 1 (on)
> keepsettings = 1 (on)
> nowerr = 0 (off)
> readonly = 0 (off)
> readahead = 8 (on)
> geometry = 3649/255/63, sectors = 58633344, start = 0
> /dev/hdc:
>
> Model=Maxtor 90845D4, FwRev=GAS54112, SerialNo=A408XDSC Config={ Fixed
> }
> RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=29
> BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=256kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
> CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=-66060037, LBA=yes, LBAsects=16514064
> IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120} PIO
> modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
> DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 *udma2
>
> multcount = 16 (on)
> I/O support = 1 (32-bit)
> unmaskirq = 1 (on)
> using_dma = 1 (on)
> keepsettings = 1 (on)
> nowerr = 0 (off)
> readonly = 0 (off)
> readahead = 8 (on)
> geometry = 1027/255/63, sectors = 16514064, start = 0
> PCI devices found:
> Bus 0, device 0, function 0:
> Host bridge: VIA Technologies Unknown device (rev 196).
> Vendor id=1106. Device id=691.
> Medium devsel. Master Capable. No bursts. Prefetchable 32 bit
> memory at 0xd0000000 [0xd0000008].
> Bus 0, device 1, function 0:
> PCI bridge: VIA Technologies VT 82C598 Apollo MVP3 AGP (rev 0).
> Medium devsel. Master Capable. No bursts. Min Gnt=12.
> Bus 0, device 7, function 0:
> ISA bridge: VIA Technologies VT 82C596 Apollo Pro (rev 35).
> Medium devsel. Master Capable. No bursts.
> Bus 0, device 7, function 1:
> IDE interface: VIA Technologies VT 82C586 Apollo IDE (rev 16).
> Medium devsel. Fast back-to-back capable. Master Capable.
> Latency=32.
> I/O at 0xe000 [0xe001].
> Bus 0, device 7, function 2:
> USB Controller: VIA Technologies VT 82C586 Apollo USB (rev 17).
> Medium devsel. IRQ 10. Master Capable. Latency=32. I/O at
> 0xe400 [0xe401].
> Bus 0, device 7, function 3:
> Host bridge: VIA Technologies Unknown device (rev 48).
> Vendor id=1106. Device id=3050.
> Medium devsel. Fast back-to-back capable.
> Bus 0, device 17, function 0:
> Ethernet controller: Realtek 8029 (rev 0).
> Medium devsel. IRQ 9.
> I/O at 0xe800 [0xe801].
> Bus 1, device 0, function 0:
> VGA compatible controller: Matrox Matrox G200 AGP (rev 1).
> Medium devsel. Fast back-to-back capable. IRQ 11. Master
> Capable. Latency=32. Min Gnt=16.Max Lat=32.
> Prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xd8000000 [0xd8000008].
> Non-prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xd4000000 [0xd4000000].
> Non-prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xd5000000 [0xd5000000].
> (BTW, this is a Tyan S1854 (Trinity 400) motherboard.) If anyone has
> any thoughts on whether I'm likely to get bitten, I'd sure like to hear
> them.
> Thanks!
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.hardware.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Hardware Digest
******************************
