im pretty sure scsi reports the last addressable sector, as opposed to the
total number of sectors. will have a diff shortly.
dlg
On 20/12/2010, at 2:15 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> I could swear we had the sizes right but I'll have another look at this.
>
> What raid type did you test this with
Mail para ser visto con conexion, si no puede verlo, click Aqui
[IMAGE]
FeedBack
[IMAGE]
FeedBack
Feedback, comunicacion en serio
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
bl
Agencia de Prensa y Noticias, servicio de Mailing y Publicidad
email: veron...@agenciafeedback.com.ar | website:
www.agenciafeedback.com.ar
How To Remove Your Moles, Warts & Skin Tags in 3 Days - Easily, Naturally And
Without Surgery.
Click here : http://business-page.us/index.php/moles-and-warts-removal
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> I could swear we had the sizes right but I'll have another look at this.
>
> What raid type did you test this with?
I can repro. Crypto raid.
sd0g: size 20986560 this is the real disk
sd1a: 20985952 offset 64
sd1c: 20986033
softraid
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 02:17:46PM +0100, Andreas Bartelt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed that the size of softraid(4) disks is one sector too large.
>
> In the following description, the native disk is sd4c (which is of type
> RAID), and the corresponding virtual softraid(4) disk will be sd5.
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:51:31AM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
> On 12/19/10 11:15, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> > I could swear we had the sizes right but I'll have another look at this.
> >
> > What raid type did you test this with?
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 02:17:46PM +0100, Andreas Bartelt
On 12/19/10 11:15, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> I could swear we had the sizes right but I'll have another look at this.
>
> What raid type did you test this with?
>
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 02:17:46PM +0100, Andreas Bartelt wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've noticed that the size of softraid(4) disks is
On 12/19/10 17:15, Marco Peereboom wrote:
I could swear we had the sizes right but I'll have another look at this.
What raid type did you test this with?
I've only tested CRYPTO, but sr_meta_native_probe() seems to be used by
all disciplines.
Try newfs /dev/rsdXc where X is a virtual softr
I could swear we had the sizes right but I'll have another look at this.
What raid type did you test this with?
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 02:17:46PM +0100, Andreas Bartelt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed that the size of softraid(4) disks is one sector too large.
>
> In the following description
As promised.
This needs lots of testing so apply, test and reply to jordan and me please.
- Forwarded message from Jordan Hargrave -
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 19:06:26 -0700 (MST)
From: Jordan Hargrave
To: ma...@openbsd.org
Subject: ACPI new fulltask diff
This is a modified acpitask patc
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 04:12:02PM +0100, Christopher Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've finally found some time to work on the fan control support for my
> thinkpad.
> But I'm having problems calling to acpiec_write() from sysctl or
> timeout_set(9) context. (Assertion failure in acpiec_gpehandler(
Hi,
I've finally found some time to work on the fan control support for my
thinkpad.
But I'm having problems calling to acpiec_write() from sysctl or
timeout_set(9) context. (Assertion failure in acpiec_gpehandler()).
According to dev/acpi/acpiec.c:229 this function is meant to be called
only from
TC
Hello,
I've noticed that the size of softraid(4) disks is one sector too large.
In the following description, the native disk is sd4c (which is of type
RAID), and the corresponding virtual softraid(4) disk will be sd5. I
will assume that sd5 is of discipline CRYPTO, but the problem should be
t
14 matches
Mail list logo
