On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 17:50 -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> > 0000:02:01.0 0100: 9005:00cf (rev 01)
> > 0000:02:01.1 0100: 9005:00cf (rev 01)
>
> OK strike that. The aic94xx cards all have IDs like 9005:04XX
>
> There does seem to be a cockup in the initialisation tables, but I can't
> see how it could affect what you're seeing. (PCI_DEVICE() uses the .name
> = value initialisation method and the fields following are unnamed). Do
> you build both of these into the kernel, and if so does it work when
> they're both modular?
Yep, I build both of them in. Making them both modular will require a
wee bit more time, as the aic7xxx has my root disk on it, and I don't
have any initrds.
In any case, I'm starting to get some funky results. I can't get the
problem to reappear in the tree where I was doing the bisect, but my
development tree where I first saw it is still broken.
I'll do some more digging and get out a more reliable bug report.
-- Dave
-
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]
