Andries Brouwer wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 11:51:00PM -0500, Kurt Garloff wrote:
SuSE 9.1
Vendor: easyRAID Model: X16 Rev: 0001
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03
scsi: host 0 channel 0 id 5 lun 0x6500737952414944 has a LUN larger than
currently supported.
Looks like random garbage.
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 11:51:00PM -0500, Kurt Garloff wrote:
> > SuSE 9.1
> > Vendor: easyRAID Model: X16 Rev: 0001
> > Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03
> > scsi: host 0 channel 0 id 5 lun 0x6500737952414944 has a LUN larger than
> > currently supported.
>
> Looks like random
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 11:51:00PM -0500, Kurt Garloff wrote:
SuSE 9.1
Vendor: easyRAID Model: X16 Rev: 0001
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03
scsi: host 0 channel 0 id 5 lun 0x6500737952414944 has a LUN larger than
currently supported.
Looks like random garbage.
I read e
Andries Brouwer wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 11:51:00PM -0500, Kurt Garloff wrote:
SuSE 9.1
Vendor: easyRAID Model: X16 Rev: 0001
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03
scsi: host 0 channel 0 id 5 lun 0x6500737952414944 has a LUN larger than
currently supported.
Looks like random garbage.
Kurt Garloff wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:39:02PM -0500, Joe Krahn wrote:
There are apparently several devices that return bad data
for the REPORT_LUNS query, but do not return an error.
The newer kernels only do sequential LUN scans if REPORT_LUNS
fails. There may need to be a kernel option
Kurt Garloff wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:39:02PM -0500, Joe Krahn wrote:
There are apparently several devices that return bad data
for the REPORT_LUNS query, but do not return an error.
The newer kernels only do sequential LUN scans if REPORT_LUNS
fails. There may need to be a kernel option
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:39:02PM -0500, Joe Krahn wrote:
> There are apparently several devices that return bad data
> for the REPORT_LUNS query, but do not return an error.
> The newer kernels only do sequential LUN scans if REPORT_LUNS
> fails. There may need to be a kernel option to force
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:39:02PM -0500, Joe Krahn wrote:
There are apparently several devices that return bad data
for the REPORT_LUNS query, but do not return an error.
The newer kernels only do sequential LUN scans if REPORT_LUNS
fails. There may need to be a kernel option to force
8 matches
Mail list logo
