On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 1:48 AM Harry Schmalzbauer
wrote:
> Am 14.02.2021 um 02:36 schrieb Mark Millard via freebsd-current:
> > On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> >> Are you aware of gpart create?
> >>
> >> Warner
> > From which I derive that I had an implicit, incorrect
> > as
On 2021-Feb-16, at 02:22, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
> Am 16.02.2021 um 11:08 schrieb Mark Millard:
>> On 2021-Feb-16, at 00:48, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
>>> Am 14.02.2021 um 02:36 schrieb Mark Millard via freebsd-current:
On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
> Are you aw
Am 16.02.2021 um 11:08 schrieb Mark Millard:
On 2021-Feb-16, at 00:48, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
Am 14.02.2021 um 02:36 schrieb Mark Millard via freebsd-current:
On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
Are you aware of gpart create?
Warner
From which I derive that I had an implicit
On 2021-Feb-16, at 00:48, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
> Am 14.02.2021 um 02:36 schrieb Mark Millard via freebsd-current:
>> On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>>> Are you aware of gpart create?
>>>
>>> Warner
>> From which I derive that I had an implicit, incorrect
>> assumption tha
Am 14.02.2021 um 02:36 schrieb Mark Millard via freebsd-current:
On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
Are you aware of gpart create?
Warner
From which I derive that I had an implicit, incorrect
assumption that gpart show would in some way list
everything available that gpart could m
On 2021-Feb-13, at 17:38, Warner Losh wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2021, 6:36 PM Mark Millard wrote:
>
> On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > Are you aware of gpart create?
> >
> > Warner
>
> From which I derive that I had an implicit, incorrect
> assumption that gpart show would
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021, 6:36 PM Mark Millard wrote:
>
> On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > Are you aware of gpart create?
> >
> > Warner
>
> From which I derive that I had an implicit, incorrect
> assumption that gpart show would in some way list
> everything available that gpart c
On 2021-Feb-13, at 16:40, Warner Losh wrote:
> Are you aware of gpart create?
>
> Warner
>From which I derive that I had an implicit, incorrect
assumption that gpart show would in some way list
everything available that gpart could manipulate
(including for use in creation).
So I need to fin
Are you aware of gpart create?
Warner
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021, 4:41 PM Mark Millard via freebsd-current <
freebsd-current@freebsd.org> wrote:
> I plugged in a new Optane and booted FreeBSD on the
> ThreadRipper 1950X system but FreeBSD did not show
> the drive in gpart show. (It is unique by size i
I plugged in a new Optane and booted FreeBSD on the
ThreadRipper 1950X system but FreeBSD did not show
the drive in gpart show. (It is unique by size in the
context and so would be hard to miss for anything
that listed sizes. Lack of listing a size would also
stand out.)
So I did what I've done in
Still working on patches for drivers from the last century.
The latest installment is a patch for aic(4). It should
apply to 8 and 9 as well as HEAD. Please ensure INVARIANTS
is enabled during testing.
http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/aic_locking.patch
--
John Baldwin
Attached is a patch for the aic(4) driver to do the following:
- enable 10MHz (fast SCSI) operation on boards that support it. (only
aic6360 boards with fast SCSI enabled can do it)
- bounds check sync periods and offsets passed in from the transport layer
- tell the user which resource
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 15:02:45 -0600, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> "Justin T. Gibbs" wrote:
>
> > >After upgrading my system from 13'th December to latest -current,
> > >the ahc driver doesn't attach to onboard AIC-7896 second channel
> > >anym
>> Can you send me the output of "pciconf -l" on this system? My guess
>> is that your MB vendor did not use the correct subsystem ID for the
>> aic7896 to enable the second channel. We only recently started to
>> pay
>
>> attention to this. What MB is this?
>
>My system doesn't find any scsi c
"Justin T. Gibbs" wrote:
> >After upgrading my system from 13'th December to latest -current,
> >the ahc driver doesn't attach to onboard AIC-7896 second channel
> >anymore. I'm cc'g to Mr. Gibbs and Smith in hope they are the right
> >pe
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 07:48:36AM -0700, "Justin T. Gibbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you send me the output of "pciconf -l" on this system? My guess
> is that your MB vendor did not use the correct subsystem ID for the
> aic7896 to enable the second channel. We only recently started to
>After upgrading my system from 13'th December to latest -current,
>the ahc driver doesn't attach to onboard AIC-7896 second channel
>anymore. I'm cc'g to Mr. Gibbs and Smith in hope they are the right
>persons.
>
>Dmesg:
Can you send me the output of &qu
After upgrading my system from 13'th December to latest -current,
the ahc driver doesn't attach to onboard AIC-7896 second channel
anymore. I'm cc'g to Mr. Gibbs and Smith in hope they are the right
persons.
Dmesg:
Copyright (c) 1992-2001 The FreeBSD Project.
Copyright
Hi,
could please someone with commit privs review and commit the attached patches.
They will enable (at least) Laptop-users to load the two modules on demand.
At least the aic(4) module (in conjunction with cam(4) ) is verified to
work when loaded after startup (not preloaded).
The fdc(4) module
> > Could you disable acpi and try again to make the problem clearer?
> > Without `device acpi' line in your kernel config file, any ACPI code
> > isn't compiled in your kernel.
>
> That was the first thing I tried when mine failed. It didn't make any
> difference - I saw the same failure (the pa
Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
> All I can say is that acpi is initilized after pcib and its children
> are attached so I don't think ACPI code affects PCI stuff...
>
> > # Power management support (see LINT for more options)
> > #device apm
> > device acpi
>
> Could you disabl
> Could you disable acpi and try again to make the problem clearer?
> Without `device acpi' line in your kernel config file, any ACPI code
As I mentioned, I've already done so. I know ACPI isn't causing the panic,
but it does seem to change the BEHAVIOR of the panic. (I get the errors
mentione
Hi,
> And, of course, the kernel config... a fair amount of crap still not trimmed
> out, but the only difference between this config and the one used to build
> the functional kernel is apm commented out and ACPI added, which I've already
> tried reversing without much difference.
All I can say
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Brandon Hume wrote:
> Sounds similar to what I'm getting; after a boot I get a load of the
> following:
>
> ahc0: ahc_intr - referenced scb not valid during SELTO (31, 255)
That's what I get... although I get SELTO (31, 0)
> Similar config to yours; a Tyan Thunder SMP BX
Chris Hedley writes:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Brandon Hume wrote:
> > Just after the "waiting for SCSI devices to settle" message, I'll get a
> > number of SCB errors (which I don't have written down, unfortunately), and
> > then eventually a panic. This is with ACPI enabled... if I don't enable
>
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Brandon Hume wrote:
> Just after the "waiting for SCSI devices to settle" message, I'll get a
> number of SCB errors (which I don't have written down, unfortunately), and
> then eventually a panic. This is with ACPI enabled... if I don't enable
> ACPI, it will proceed immedia
milar to the following:
ahc_match_scb(c0e7e000, c0e8e230, 0, 41, 0, 9, 1)
ahc_search_qinfifo(c0e7e000, 0, 41, 0, 9, 1, 0, 1)
ahc_timeout(c0e8e168, 4000, 0, 0, )
softclock(0, 18, c02b0010, 10, )
doreti_swi()
I can dig up my kernel config and a "functional" dmesg as soon as I ge
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> I get the following:
>
> pci0: unknown card (vendor=0x9004, dev=0x5078) at 8.0 irq 11
Nothing has changed in this area for some time and the id for this
card is in the table of supported devices. Do you get any additional
information from a boot -v?
I get the following:
pci0: unknown card (vendor=0x9004, dev=0x5078) at 8.0 irq 11
from a machine that has:
# SCSI Controllers
#device ahb # EISA AHA1742 family
device ahc # AHA2940 and onboard AIC7xxx devices
#device amd # AMD 53C974
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 03:07:13PM -0500, Brandon Gale wrote:
> I was under the impression that although the driver functions properly, the
> speed is still at 80MB/sec, and not the full 160MB/sec. Correct?
I can't say as there are only U2 drives connected.
--
B.Walter COSMO-P
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:00:56AM +0900, Osamu MIHARA wrote:
> Is anybody here working on driver for AIC-7899, Ataptec's Ultra160
> SCSI controller???
It's working fine here:
ahc1: port 0xb400-0xb4ff mem
0xdf80-0xdf800fff irq 11 at device 12.0 on pci0
OptionMode = 3
ah
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Osamu MIHARA writes:
: Is anybody here working on driver for AIC-7899, Ataptec's Ultra160
: SCSI controller???
I thought that Justin just did commits for this.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-curr
On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 20:11:38 -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> >
> > It will only work at Ultra2 speeds right now, Ultra160 support is coming,
> > though.
>
> To be fair, the sym driver already supports Ultra3. And Qlogic Ultra3 support
> is coming too.
Yes, I should have qualified that. "Ultr
>
> It will only work at Ultra2 speeds right now, Ultra160 support is coming,
> though.
To be fair, the sym driver already supports Ultra3. And Qlogic Ultra3 support
is coming too.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:00:56 +0900, Osamu MIHARA wrote:
> Is anybody here working on driver for AIC-7899, Ataptec's Ultra160
> SCSI controller???
It should work fine under -current.
It will only work at Ultra2 speeds right now, Ultra160 support is coming,
though.
Ken
--
Ke
Is anybody here working on driver for AIC-7899, Ataptec's Ultra160
SCSI controller???
--
Osamu MIHARA // NEC Printers Division
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Thanks very much for this driver, Luoqi.
I am using it in a -current built from October 14 sources,
with a new kernel of course. The cdrom produces the following,
though:
Oct 22 14:14:35 two /kernel: Waiting 15 seconds for SCSI devices to settle
Oct 22 14:14:35 two /kernel: (
s out with the following message:
(probe6:aic0:0:6:0): ccb 0xc0df1c00 - timed out
I moved then the Philips CD writer (not the greatest of all SCSI
devices, but it works) to the aic controller, but then the machine hangs
at boot time with a lot of time out messages like:
(probe17:aic0:0:2:2): cc
> Luoqi Chen wrote:
> >
> > I compiled a kernel for -stable, but was unable to boot from it. Does anyone
> > know if there is any incompatibility between the -current boot loader and a
> > -stable kernel?
>
> AFAIK, there is no difference between them (the loaders :).
>
> Try from boot2.
>
It
Luoqi Chen wrote:
>
> I compiled a kernel for -stable, but was unable to boot from it. Does anyone
> know if there is any incompatibility between the -current boot loader and a
> -stable kernel?
AFAIK, there is no difference between them (the loaders :).
Try from boot2.
--
Daniel C. Sobral
i have just tried the latest version of aic cam driver by Luoqi, and it
seems that all significant problems were solved.
aic0 at port 0x340-0x35f irq 9 on isa0
...
Waiting 15 seconds for SCSI devices to settle
(probe0:aic0:0:0:0): TEST UNIT READY. CDB: 0 0 0 0 0 0
(probe0:aic0:0:0:0): UNIT
> Luoqi Chen wrote:
> >
> > I've ported it to -stable, but I don't have a machine to test it, please
> > if you could. The code is in http://www.freebsd.org/~luoqi/aic/stable,
> > apply patch files.diff, copy aic_isa.c to i386/isa, the rest goes to dev/aic
> I also tried to experiment with the aic driver (and also failed, little
> similar to Ilya's problems)
>
Could you download the new set of files and see if it helps?
> as devices. What puzzles me is why the probe at the aic0 wants to look
> at bus 0. Shouldn't that be
options CAMDEBUG
options CAM_DEBUG_BUS=-1
options CAM_DEBUG_TARGET=-1
options CAM_DEBUG_LUN=-1
options CAM_DEBUG_FLAGS="CAM_DEBUG_INFO|CAM_DEBUG_TRACE|CAM_DEBUG_CDB"
> > > what is possible reason of such behaviour and what should i try to do to
> &
Hello Oliver,
Wednesday, October 20, 1999, 4:12:37 AM, you wrote:
OF> > Chaintech 6BTM mainboard with Celeron 416A processor and 128 Mb of memory
it is just Celeron 333A overclocked up to 416 MHz (5 x 83.5).
Best regards,
Ilyamailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsub
Luoqi Chen wrote:
>
> I've ported it to -stable, but I don't have a machine to test it, please
> if you could. The code is in http://www.freebsd.org/~luoqi/aic/stable,
> apply patch files.diff, copy aic_isa.c to i386/isa, the rest goes to dev/aic.
>
I cannot compile
I also tried to experiment with the aic driver (and also failed, little
similar to Ilya's problems)
Configuration:
Asus P2B-DS motherboard with dual PII-350, 128 Mb of memory, running
4.0-19990918-CURRENT.
Adaptec AIC 7890 on-board U2W SCSI controller.
Adaptec AVA 1505 (AIC 6360Q) isa
On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Luoqi Chen wrote:
> > i've tried new "camfied" aic driver today and failed. here is a brief
> > report.
> >
> > results:
> >
> > aic controller was successfully found by the kernel, but after "Waiting 15
>
machine to test it, please
if you could. The code is in http://www.freebsd.org/~luoqi/aic/stable,
apply patch files.diff, copy aic_isa.c to i386/isa, the rest goes to dev/aic.
>
> -- Chris Dillon - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>FreeBSD: The fastest and most stable serv
Probably a Celeron 333a running at an 83.5Mhz FSB.
DS
> Ilya Naumov wrote in list.freebsd-current:
> > Chaintech 6BTM mainboard with Celeron 416A processor and 128
> Mb of memory
>
> Please excuse me -- what is a "Celeron 416A"?
>
> Regards
>Oliver Fromme
To Unsubscri
Ilya Naumov wrote in list.freebsd-current:
> Chaintech 6BTM mainboard with Celeron 416A processor and 128 Mb of memory
Please excuse me -- what is a "Celeron 416A"?
Regards
Oliver Fromme
--
Oliver Fromme, Leibnizstr. 18/61, 38678 Clausthal, Germany
(Info: finger userinfo:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> i've tried new "camfied" aic driver today and failed. here is a brief
> report.
>
> my configuration:
>
> Chaintech 6BTM mainboard with Celeron 416A processor and 128 Mb of memory
> Adaptec AIC-6360 SCSI controller (port 0x340 irq 9), irq 9 is reserved
i've tried new "camfied" aic driver today and failed. here is a brief
report.
my configuration:
Chaintech 6BTM mainboard with Celeron 416A processor and 128 Mb of memory
Adaptec AIC-6360 SCSI controller (port 0x340 irq 9), irq 9 is reserved for
Legacy/ISA card in bios setup
P
On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Chris Dillon wrote:
> Should this apply cleanly to -stable? If so, I'll give it a shot when
> I get home.
I'll answer my own question (which, oddly enough, still hasn't made it
to the list after about two hours). I forgot about newbus. It
doesn't work, of course, and my C
0 card. So I decided to bite the bullet and camify the aic driver
> myself (I've long given up hope someone else would do it.)
WOOHOO!! I'll be your guinea pig for trying this on -stable if you
like. All I have is a ZIP drive to test things with. If it would
make any difference, I could
> I suspect someone will want a PCCARD front end as well. I'll write it if
> someone will work with me on testing.
You have a guinie pig^W^Wtester.
--
-- David([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
0 card. So I decided to bite the bullet and camify the aic driver
> myself (I've long given up hope someone else would do it.)
Luoqi, you are a god. I bow to thee.
Doug White| FreeBSD: The Power to Serve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.FreeBSD.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail
On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Luoqi Chen wrote:
> DMA is not supported, sync transfer is supported but not tested, neither
> pnp nor pccard is supported. My card doesn't support any of these, so
> there's not much I could do, I hope sopme of you could fill in the blanks.
Looks pretty good. I'll whip up a
After the recent signal related changes, the pre-cam kernel I saved a long
time ago no longer works with (even statically compiled) user applications,
which meant I had no way to access my files on an old disk hanging off an
aic6360 card. So I decided to bite the bullet and camify the aic driver
On Sun, Apr 11, 1999 at 11:29:09AM -0500, Bob Willcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 12:28:47PM -0800, Brian Beattie wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> > > The aic driver will likely oneday be ported. However, no one has come
> > > forward to do it
On Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 12:28:47PM -0800, Brian Beattie wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > The aic driver will likely oneday be ported. However, no one has come
> > forward to do it. It is a highly desirable driver to have (even if
>
> Umm, I&#x
In article <99040212091200.24...@camel.avias.com>,
Ilya Naumov wrote:
> how ironic - older 2.2.x do support it, but newer 3.1/4.0 does not.
What is ironic about that? Old OS versions support old hardware,
and new OS versions support new hardware. It makes perfect sense to
me.
John "My Sun 3/
; > I looked into it, so I may be misremembering.)
> It seems programming manuals for the AIC 6[23]60 are also available,
> and there is even a FreeBSD driver for it... :-)
and it is too popular controller to ignore it at all. how ironic - older 2.2.x
do support it, but newer 3.1/4.0 does
misremembering.)
It seems programming manuals for the AIC 6[23]60 are also available,
and there is even a FreeBSD driver for it... :-)
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
d...@newsguy.com
d...@freebsd.org
"nothing better than the ability to perform cunning linguistics
On Thu, Apr 01, 1999 at 11:55:23AM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> Brian Beattie wrote:
> >
> > > writing it would be a pain) because the only pccard scsi cards that are
> > > out there are aic-6[23]60 based.
> >
> > Not having a pcmcia slot or car
Brian Beattie wrote:
>
> > writing it would be a pain) because the only pccard scsi cards that are
> > out there are aic-6[23]60 based.
>
> Not having a pcmcia slot or card, I am not sure about support for this.
Once aic6[23]60 is working, the PCMCIA stuff is easily done.
On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> The aic driver will likely oneday be ported. However, no one has come
> forward to do it. It is a highly desirable driver to have (even if
Umm, I'm still working on the aic driver. Slowly, but working on it.
> writing it would be a pai
The aic driver will likely oneday be ported. However, no one has come
forward to do it. It is a highly desirable driver to have (even if
writing it would be a pain) because the only pccard scsi cards that are
out there are aic-6[23]60 based.
However, the sad fact is that the development is less
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 18:34:08 +0200, Leif Neland wrote:
> Is it doomed forever?
Grrr, I think the whole reason it was removed was to avoid questions
like this. ;-)
The removed aic driver is not under active development, and there are no
plans to revive it in the foreseeable future.
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:28:06 +0400, Ilya Naumov wrote:
>
> > i wonder what is the situation with AIC driver now? we're suffering
> > without it :)
>
> All traces of it have been completely removed from CURRE
On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 08:27:36PM +, Dan Moschuk wrote:
>
> Any hope of the aic driver gracing -current anytime soon? I'm really itching
> to port my burning software over.
No one ever bothered to port the aic driver to the new CAM
interface in 3.0 and 4.0. Since I know you
Any hope of the aic driver gracing -current anytime soon? I'm really itching
to port my burning software over.
Cheers,
--
Dan Moschuk (tfreak...@globalserve.net)
Senior Systems/Network Administrator
Globalserve Communications Inc., a Primus Canada Company
"If at first you don
For everybody who has been waiting for me finish the aic driver I thought
I should give a status report. My move is mostly complete and I am trying
to get back to working in the aic driver. Unfortunately I have run into
hardware problems. Having just bought a house I can not afford to run out
"Kenneth D. Merry" wrote:
>
> > At the moment, looking in LINT, it looks like aic still isn't
> > supported. Is that true? Does anyone know whether it will be?
>
> It's true that it isn't supported yet. We are planning on supporting it.
> B
> I'd love to see the aic supported, mostly for my notebook. However,
> no one seems to have a confluance of time, information and talent to
> write the driver, or even port the other one in all its gory.
If CAMed aic driver is available, SlimSCSI support is very
easy. First o
In message <199901190613.paa06...@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp> NAKAGAWA
Yoshihisa writes:
: Adaptec SlimSCSI is major PC-Card SCSI-IF, it is based on
: aic6360. Now, aic not supported yet, so Note-PC user can't use any
: PC-Card SCSI-IF.
I'd love to see the aic supporte
> If you want SCSI support any time soon, I would suggest getting a supported
> card. An ISA Advansys card might be a good, cheap substitute for your
> 6360/6260 board.
Adaptec SlimSCSI is major PC-Card SCSI-IF, it is based on
aic6360. Now, aic not supported yet, so Note-PC user can&
Peter Mutsaers wrote...
> Hello,
>
> When CAM was integrated someone reported that the aic driver was not
> ready yet for CAM, but that "Brian Beattie is
> working on it".
Right.
> At the moment, looking in LINT, it looks like aic still isn't
> supported. Is
Hello,
When CAM was integrated someone reported that the aic driver was not
ready yet for CAM, but that "Brian Beattie is
working on it".
At the moment, looking in LINT, it looks like aic still isn't
supported. Is that true? Does anyone know whether it will be?
Thanks,
--
79 matches
Mail list logo
