Re: [CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-08 Thread Matthew Kent
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 11:57 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
 You picked a good day to ask, I am getting ready to build the new plus
 kernel for c5 right now :D

Any luck with this? :)
-- 
Matthew Kent \ SA \ bravenet.com

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-08 Thread Filipe Brandenburger
Hi,

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:46, Matthew Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 11:57 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
 You picked a good day to ask, I am getting ready to build the new plus
 kernel for c5 right now :D

 Any luck with this? :)

I contacted Johnny last Friday, he was still working on the kmods. He
is making the kmods use the RHEL weak updates method and not the
fedora method. This will improve things a lot, because they won't have
to be rebuilt each time a new kernel is released. Last Friday, 2 of
the 3 kmods were working correctly, he was working on the last one at
the time.

I'm sure it will be ready when it's ready! :-)

Filipe
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-08 Thread Spike Turner
Matthew Kent wrote:

 Any luck with this? :)

Not wanting to sound like a spoil sport but if its critical
to your server(s) can't you build your own kernel, pretty 
sure I've seen this discussed on the docs list. I suppose
the CentOS plus one has to go through QA and regression 
testing no?

Spike.


  

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-08 Thread Matthew Kent
On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 12:56 -0500, Robert wrote:
 
 Spike Turner wrote:
  Matthew Kent wrote:
 

  Any luck with this? :)
  
 
  Not wanting to sound like a spoil sport but if its critical
  to your server(s) can't you build your own kernel, pretty 
  sure I've seen this discussed on the docs list. I suppose
  the CentOS plus one has to go through QA and regression 
  testing no?
 

Not sure where I said its critical? It's merely a friendly question I
thought might be interesting to the other centosplus users on the list.

  Spike.

 Hey, if he has a critical need, he could simply trek over to 
 http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/kernel/5/plus/2.6.18-92.1.13.el5.centos.plus/
  
 and help Johnny test a build that stands a *much* better chance of 
 working right that a home-made one.

Wasn't aware that existed, thanks!
-- 
Matthew Kent \ SA \ bravenet.com

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


[CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-01 Thread Filipe Brandenburger
Hi,

I have an Adaptec eSATA card, model 1225SA:
http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/products/Controllers/Hardware/sata/entry/AAR-1225SA/

Although the chipset is sata_sil24, it is not recognized by default by
the kernel because its PCI ID is different than the ones recognized by
this driver on the CentOS kernel. The driver recognizes PCI IDs such
as 0x3132, 0x0242, 0x3131, but not 0x0244, which is the one this card
has.

I found out that it works with the latest kernel, and that the patch
to make it work only adds the 0x0244 PCI ID to the list of IDs
recognized by the sata_sil24 driver. Here is the patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=464b3286b4aa459059c6fda85ba55185fd21d9fc;hp=70a3143af87c6ca188107cbd49ab5eec2c86c456

Following the instructions on the Wiki, I built a custom kernel based
on the CentOS Plus kernel, but adding this patch. The adapter worked
as expected with that kernel.

So I ask: Would it be possible to incorporate this patch to the
default set of patches applied on the CentOS Plus kernel? I would
really appreciate it since that would make it easier for me to keep
updated without worrying about the card.

Thanks a lot!
Filipe
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-01 Thread Johnny Hughes
Filipe Brandenburger wrote:
 Hi,
 
 I have an Adaptec eSATA card, model 1225SA:
 http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/products/Controllers/Hardware/sata/entry/AAR-1225SA/
 
 Although the chipset is sata_sil24, it is not recognized by default by
 the kernel because its PCI ID is different than the ones recognized by
 this driver on the CentOS kernel. The driver recognizes PCI IDs such
 as 0x3132, 0x0242, 0x3131, but not 0x0244, which is the one this card
 has.
 
 I found out that it works with the latest kernel, and that the patch
 to make it work only adds the 0x0244 PCI ID to the list of IDs
 recognized by the sata_sil24 driver. Here is the patch:
 http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=464b3286b4aa459059c6fda85ba55185fd21d9fc;hp=70a3143af87c6ca188107cbd49ab5eec2c86c456
 
 Following the instructions on the Wiki, I built a custom kernel based
 on the CentOS Plus kernel, but adding this patch. The adapter worked
 as expected with that kernel.
 
 So I ask: Would it be possible to incorporate this patch to the
 default set of patches applied on the CentOS Plus kernel? I would
 really appreciate it since that would make it easier for me to keep
 updated without worrying about the card.
 

You picked a good day to ask, I am getting ready to build the new plus
kernel for c5 right now :D

I will put that patch in there too if it applies cleanly for me.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Request for additional patch in CentOS Plus kernel

2008-10-01 Thread Filipe Brandenburger
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 12:57, Johnny Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 You picked a good day to ask, I am getting ready to build the new plus
 kernel for c5 right now :D

Great to know! :-D

 I will put that patch in there too if it applies cleanly for me.

Let me know if it doesn't. I included it in the specfile as
Patch40 to go after the Patch9 (last one in CentOS Plus), but
I don't think that's needed.

In any case, if you look at the patch you will see it's one line only,
so it's really trivial.

Let me know if I can help with anything else to get this patch included!

Thanks,
Filipe
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos