Lou, Thanks for your reply.
E5000 is a sun4u. Machine was very popular in 1999 (when the driver was developed) and in the developer's notes the EX500 series (which share the same architecture, just a faster backplane) is explicitely mentioned. If the driver was not written for Sun4u, Sun4m or Sun4d, what was it written for ? Regards Raoul -----Original Message----- From: Lou Picciano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:11 PM To: SuSE SPARC LIST Cc: Solarisexpert.com; Matthias Schulz Subject: Re: [suse-sparc] FC-AL: FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A Hello! Your problem is due to architecture-dependent configuration and source files in the Linux distribution. This is exactly the behavior I - and others - have now seen on sun4m architecture using the soc, pluto and fcal modules. It walks and talks like an IRQ error. The good news (if we can spin it a little!) is that the compile _does_ work on other architectures, so there's hope... The following is thanks to Matthias Schulz - on this list: 'in the directory /usr/src/linux/arch/sparc/kernel there are at least different files for sun4m and sun4d architecture. One of the files deals with interrupts.' I think we can safely surmise that Jakub Jelinek - who authored the soc modules and these architecture files - did most of his work on a newer-architecture machine. We've tried to email him, but as yet no reply. Matthias has gotten the soc module working, on a new Linux kernel compile, on a (E1000?). One of you guys much more brilliant than me would probably be able to figure out, and correct this file, for sun4m, in an hour. For the time being, though, I am completely dead in the water regarding use of my SS10 with a fibre interface... Any help?? Lou Picciano > I have tried them all: > > I used the both the 2.2.20 and the 2.4.18 kernel (which I had to compile > myself since there is no downloadable version anywhere). > > I insmod fc4 first and socal righ after (I have also tried modprobe fcal) > > This is what get on console > > socal.c: SOC+ driver v1.1 9/Feb/99 Jakub Jelinek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port B > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port B > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port B > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port B > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port B > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port A > FC: Cannot enque FLOGI/REPORT_MAP packet on socal0 port B > > This is the output of "lsmod" > > socal 6824 0 (autoclean) (unused) > fc4 11336 0 [socal] > > The machine is an E5000 attache to an A5000 array. Boot channels are > attached to the array from the built-in SOC+ ports of the I/O board. > > ANY IDEAS ? What is the relationship between the drivers. FC4 sets up the > loop (that was my understanding, but why is it not seeing anything) ? > > RV > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
