[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: iti-4120



On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:42:23PM -0800, Bill MacAllister wrote:
> --On Saturday, March 04, 2006 02:54:30 PM -0500 Jay Estabrook 
> <Jay.Estabrook@hp.com> wrote:
> 
> > Only thing occurs to me is bus termination issues; some drivers are
> > more sensitive to that.
> >
> > Does it ALWAYS see ALL of however many disks that are installed on one
> > of the cables, but not always all that are installed on the other
> > cable? If so, then suspect the second cable and/or its termination.
> 
> SRM always sees all of the disks.  This is a DECServer 5305 box  with the 
> integral StorgeWorks shelf and an external StorageWorks shelf.  I'll check 
> the switches on the personality board of the external box.

Well, SRM wasn't the problem, then. I was really asking about what
Linux saw on the buses, as it is possible that those drivers are
sensitive to the termination, and not SRM's drivers (as you already
had mentioned that SRM always sees them all in an earlier post).

> This is really puzzling though.  I have add to add /dev devices to support 
> more than two tape drives on a system before.  It looks like a similar 
> situation to me.  I don't really know how /dev/sd devices get created.  Is 
> this the responsibility of the driver?

Well, I guess there could be a limitation in the number of devices that
the installer might create, but the driver probe of the bus OUGHT to
indicate all the devices that IT sees, regardless of how many devices
the installer creates in /dev.

Does Linux always miss the LAST devices that could be created (and is
successful on earlier devices on the SAME bus)? If so, that could
indicate an installer limitation.

 --Jay++

---------------------------------------------------------------
Jay A Estabrook                            HPTC - XC I & B
Hewlett-Packard Company - ZKO1-3/D-B.8     (603) 884-0301
110 Spit Brook Road, Nashua NH 03062       Jay.Estabrook@hp.com
---------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: