Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-29 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Gene Heskett wrote: For starters, enable CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR. That could stand to be moved or renamed, it is well buried in the menu for the REAL scsi stuffs, which I don't have any of. Enabled building now. The SCSI support type (disk, tape, CD-ROM) section of

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-29 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Alan Cox wrote: things in the kernel that refer to SCSI probably should say storage (or ATA, really, but that would make the acronyms confusing). SCSI is a command protocol. It is what your CD-ROM drive and USB storage devices talk (albeit with a bit of an accent).

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-29 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Alan Cox wrote: not one problem but lots---is sufficiently widespread that a Mini HOWTO, say, would be really welcome and, I'm guessing, widely used. We don't see very many libata problems at the distro level and they for the most part boil down to - error

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-29 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Alan Cox wrote: The SCSI error reporting really ought to include a simple interpretation of the error for end users (The drive doesn't support this command A sector's data got lost The drive timed out The drive failed The drive is entirely gone). There's too much

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-28 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Richard Heck wrote: Daniel Barkalow wrote: Can you switch back to old IDE to get your work done (and to make sure it's not a hardware issue that's developed recently)? I think it'd be really, REALLY helpful to a lot of people if you, or someone, could explain

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-28 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gene Heskett wrote: I believe at this point, its moot. I captured quite a few instances of that error message while rebooting the last time, all of which occurred long before I logged in and did a startx (I boot to runlevel 3 here), so the kernel was NOT tainted at

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-28 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gene Heskett wrote: On Monday 28 January 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: Building this and installing it along with the appropriate initrd (which might be handled by Fedora's install scripts) Or mine, which I've been using for years. You're ahead of a surprising number

Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24

2008-01-28 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gene Heskett wrote: On Monday 28 January 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gene Heskett wrote: On Monday 28 January 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: Building this and installing it along with the appropriate initrd (which might be handled by Fedora's

Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-15 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 06:23:34PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote: I don't see any reason that we couldn't have a tool accessible to Ubuntu users that does a real git bisect. Git is really good at being scripted by fancy GUIs. It should be easy

Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-14 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: There are two parts to this. One is a Ubuntu development kernel which we can give to large numbers of people to expand our testing pool. But if we don't do a better job of responding to bug reports that would be generated by expanded testing this

Re: [PATCH 0/4]: Resolve MSI vs. INTX_DISABLE quirks.

2007-10-24 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Barkalow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:58:45 -0400 (EDT) I'm not sure all of the pci_intx() calls in msi.c should be skipped when the quirk applies; I think some of them might be there so that the legacy interrupt

Re: [PATCH 0/4]: Resolve MSI vs. INTX_DISABLE quirks.

2007-10-23 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, David Miller wrote: The forthcoming patches are also available from: kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/msiquirk-2.6.git and clean up the handling of the common quirk wherein setting INTX_DISABLE will mistakedly disable MSI generation for some

Re: [patch] PCI: disable MSI on more ATI NorthBridges

2007-10-22 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote: Linas Vepstas wrote: On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:17:23PM +0800, Shane Huang wrote: Since we have little experience on PCI and MSI here, we had to try to As someone else pointed out, AMD should have *lots* of people with pci and msi experience on

Re: [patch] PCI: disable MSI on more ATI NorthBridges

2007-10-22 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote: Daniel Barkalow wrote: On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote: Linas Vepstas wrote: On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:17:23PM +0800, Shane Huang wrote: Since we have little experience on PCI and MSI here, we had to try to As someone else

Re: [patch] PCI: disable MSI on more ATI NorthBridges

2007-10-22 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, David Miller wrote: My suggestion is: 1) Leave the pci_intx() twiddling code in drivers/pci/msi.c 2) Add quirks for INTX_DISABLE turns off MSI too, this sets a flag in the pci_dev. 3) The pci_intx() calls in drivers/pci/msi.c are skipped if this flag from #2