[PATCH] dpt_i2o: don't set DMA_64BIT_MASK [was: Re: [stable] broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)]

2007-12-13 Thread Miquel van Smoorenburg
According to Greg KH: So, what should be added to 2.6.23-stable then? And, can I get a real changelog entry for it? This is suitable for both 2.6.23.x and 2.6.24-rc5 : linux-2.6-dpt_i2o-no-dma64.patch The dpt_i2o driver can't handle 64 bit DMA addresses, so do not let it set

Re: [PATCH] dpt_i2o: don't set DMA_64BIT_MASK [was: Re: [stable] broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)]

2007-12-13 Thread James Bottomley
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 11:11 +0100, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote: According to Greg KH: So, what should be added to 2.6.23-stable then? And, can I get a real changelog entry for it? This is suitable for both 2.6.23.x and 2.6.24-rc5 : linux-2.6-dpt_i2o-no-dma64.patch Actually, this

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Anders Henke
Hi, I'd like to let you now that my boxes are running a 32-bit kernel, so the 64-bit-uncleanliness shouldn't apply to my boxes; however, http://www.miquels.cistron.nl/linux/dpt_i2o-64bit-2.6.23.patch fixed the issue on my testbox. I took a clean 2.6.23, applied patch, recompiled the kernel,

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:58:41 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'd like to let you now that my boxes are running a 32-bit kernel, so the 64-bit-uncleanliness shouldn't apply to my boxes; however, http://www.miquels.cistron.nl/linux/dpt_i2o-64bit-2.6.23.patch fixed the

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Miquel van Smoorenburg
On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 03:38 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:58:41 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'd like to let you now that my boxes are running a 32-bit kernel, so the 64-bit-uncleanliness shouldn't apply to my boxes; however,

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Anders Henke
Am 12.12.2007 schrieb Miquel van Smoorenburg: On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 03:38 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:58:41 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'd like to let you now that my boxes are running a 32-bit kernel, so the 64-bit-uncleanliness

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Anders Henke
Am 12.12.2007 schrieb Andrew Morton: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:58:41 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'd like to let you now that my boxes are running a 32-bit kernel, so the 64-bit-uncleanliness shouldn't apply to my boxes; however,

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 14:43:42 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am 12.12.2007 schrieb Miquel van Smoorenburg: On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 03:38 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:58:41 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'd like to let you

Re: broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 11:16 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 14:43:42 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am 12.12.2007 schrieb Miquel van Smoorenburg: On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 03:38 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:58:41 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL

Re: [stable] broken dpt_i2o in 2.6.23 (was: ext2 check page: bad entry in directory) (fwd)

2007-12-12 Thread Greg KH
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 02:54:54PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 11:16 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 14:43:42 +0100 Anders Henke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am 12.12.2007 schrieb Miquel van Smoorenburg: On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 03:38 -0800, Andrew