I wrote on 2007-01-02:
> Kyuma Ohta wrote:
> ...
>> Now,I'm testing 2.6.20-rc3 for x86_64, submitted patch for this issue;
>> "Fault has happened in 'cleanuped' sbp2/1394 module in *not 32bit*
>> architecture hardwares ."
>>
>> As result of, sbp2 driver in 2.6.20-rc3 is seems to running
>> w/o any faults,but communication both host and harddrive(s)
>> was seems to be unstable yet :-(
>> Sometimes confuse packets,such as *very* older 1394 driver :-(
>
> That is, sbp2 on 2.6.20-rc3 works less stable for you than on 2.6.19? Or
> which previous kernel is the basis of your comparison? Are there any log
> messages or other diagnostics? And what hardware do you have?
>
> If you can tell which kernel was good for you, I could create a set of
> patches for you which allows to revert sbp2 while keeping the rest of
> the kernel at the level of 2.6.20-rc3, so that you could find the
> destabilizing change (if it happened in sbp2, not somewhere else).
[...]
So, how about it? Is there an actual regression? If so, we should find
the cause and fix before 2.6.20 is released.
Note, sbp2's optional parameter serialize_io=0 does not work correctly
yet with some devices (it never did), therefore use sbp2 with anything
than default parameters if there are problems.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== ---= =--=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
