Matthew Wilcox wrote:
You really need to get the fuck over yourself.
That is so rude. You need to learn some manners.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
On 10/12/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ I just sent this upstream to Andrew and Linus ]
* Turn on ACPI by default (watch for bug reports!). This should make
suspend/resume work a lot better.
Bug report for 2.6.23-mm1:
scsi8 : pata_amd
scsi9 : pata_amd
ata9: PATA max UDMA/133 cmd
ACPI Exception (exoparg2-0442): AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT, Index
(0) is beyond end of object [20070126]
ACPI Error (psparse-0537): Method parse/execution failed
[\_SB_.PCI0.IDE0.GTM_] (Node 810100318a20), AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT
ACPI Error (psparse-0537): Method parse/execution failed
Hi,
Following patches debloat drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/*.
I also had to add prototypes for ahc_lookup_scb
and ahd_lookup_scb to .h files.
1-debloat.patch
Deinlines and moves big functions from .h to .c files.
Adds prototypes for ahc_lookup_scb and ahd_lookup_scb to .h files.
2-addstatic.patch
Adds
Adds more consts
Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
vda
diff -urpN linux-2.6.23-aic-2-addstatic/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic79xx.h linux-2.6.23-aic-3-addconst/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic79xx.h
--- linux-2.6.23-aic-2-addstatic/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic79xx.h 2007-10-14 15:05:07.0
David Newall wrote:
That is so rude.
Such responses sometimes happen after provocative posts like the thread
starter's. He could have asked straight away for help with fixing his
boot environment instead of wrapping his question into a feigned design
discussion. It appeared as if he is out for
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
Compile tested and applies cleanly to 2.6.23.
I don't have this hardware anymore and cannot run test these patches.
I can test these patches on an aic7892 controller later on today if you want.
BTW while you seems to care about this driver could you have a look
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:45:47 +0400 Dave Milter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I build linux-2.6.23-mm1 and try to boot it using qemu,
and it crashed with trace like this:
do_page_fault
error_code
lock_acquire
_spin_lock_irqsave
gdth_timeout
run_timer_softirq
__do_softirq
do_softirq
I have
(please don't top-post! edited...)
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 23:24:39 +0400 Dave Milter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/14/07, Dave Milter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I build linux-2.6.23-mm1 and try to boot it using qemu,
and it crashed with trace like this:
do_page_fault
error_code
On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 16:05 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 08:11:21PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
My impression from asking questions on the linux-scsi mailing list is that
the
scsi upper/middle/lower layers doesn't use the block layer described in
On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 12:21 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:45:47 +0400 Dave Milter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I build linux-2.6.23-mm1 and try to boot it using qemu,
and it crashed with trace like this:
do_page_fault
error_code
lock_acquire
_spin_lock_irqsave
Am 14.10.2007 19:46 schrieb Stefan Richter:
David Newall wrote:
That is so rude.
Such responses sometimes happen after provocative posts like the thread
starter's.
Provocation is often in the eye of the beholder, and basic manners
should be observed nevertheless.
He could have asked
On Sunday 14 October 2007 12:46:12 pm Stefan Richter wrote:
David Newall wrote:
That is so rude.
When a reply contains as a reply to the first paragraph you're wrong with no
elaboration, and as a reply to the second paragraph nothing but expletives
and personal insults, I tend to stop
On Sunday 14 October 2007 5:24:32 pm James Bottomley wrote:
On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 16:05 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 08:11:21PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
My impression from asking questions on the linux-scsi mailing list is
that the scsi upper/middle/lower layers
--- James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 16:05 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 08:11:21PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
My impression from asking questions on the linux-scsi mailing list is
that the
scsi upper/middle/lower layers doesn't use
On Sunday October 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 14 October 2007 12:46:12 pm Stefan Richter wrote:
David Newall wrote:
That is so rude.
When a reply contains as a reply to the first paragraph you're wrong with
no
elaboration, and as a reply to the second paragraph nothing but
On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 06:45:44PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
I admit a certain amount of personal annoyance that once the SCSI
layer consumes a category of device (USB, SATA, PATA), they can
often _only_ be used by going through the SCSI midlayer. (This
strikes me as analogous to TCP/IP
This is the accumulated updates queued for 2.6.24. It contains the
usual slew of driver updates, plus some gdth and advansys rewrites. We
still have some outstanding bugs in gdth and fc4 for which I'm hoping to
sweep fixes into the next update.
The patch is available here:
Rob Landley wrote:
I was at least attempting to ask a serious question.
...
Actually, I was going through Documentation/block thinking about making a
00-INDEX for it, but my earlier questions of the scsi guys left me with the
impression that the block layer is _not_ used by the SCSI layer.
19 matches
Mail list logo
