>>T. Horsnell wrote: >>... >>> >>> When I put the lib back onto the Alpha, two test files (tapetest500K >>> and tapetest50M) written on the Opteron and read back on the Alpha, >>> matched the files as read back on the Opteron. This convinces me >>> that its (at least) a 'write' problem. >>> >> >>Is it just the library you move, or can you also try >>to move the SCSI controller and cables? > >I just move the library, but I've swapped cables as well. >I also contacted the author of the st driver and he reckons >I should try a different sort of SCSI adapter. I'm >coming to the same conclusion, but perhaps I'll try the >author of the aic79xx driver first, since I'll have to >buy an adapter in order to try things. > I found A PC running FC3 (kernel 2.6.10-1.741_FC3) which had an Adaptec 29160 SCSI adapter in a 32-bit PCI slot. I connected my SDLT2 library to it and repeated my tests. Everything worked!. Adaptec 39320 uses aic79xx driver Adaptec 29160 uses aic7xxx driver I took the 29160 out of the PC, intalled it in the Opteron box (into a 64-bit PCI-X slot) and repeated the tests. Failure. The Opteron has 4 kernels available: 2.6.10-1.770_FC3smp 2.6.10-1.770_FC3smp 2.6.10-1.770_FC3 2.6.10-1.770_FC3 I tried them all. Failure. I even booted from a Knoppix CD with 2.4.27. (This presumably means I'm running a 32-bit kernel on a 64-bit box). Failure. I remembered I had a desktop Compaq SDLT1 tapedrive on one of my systems. I tried that on the 29160 adapter. Success. I tried it on the 39320 adapter. Success. Is it some sort of datarate problem I ask myself (the SDLT1 is about half the speed of the SDL2) and the SDLT2 worked on the PC. I moved the 2960 out of the PCI-X slot into a PCI slot and tried again with the 5 Kernels listed above. Failure. I'm now running out of ideas/energy/hardware. With my original configuration, (Opteron, 2.6.10-1.770_FC3smp, Adaptec 39320, dual SDLT2) I can get verified tar dumps of at least 4GB (I havent tried anything bigger) provided I use a record size > 32768 (64*512). 65536 (256*512) works fine, as does 131072 (256*512). 32768 fails. Is it time to file a bug report? Who with? Thanks for any and all suggestions, Terry.
