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

Bug#440161: Adding support for i2o RAID adapters



I noticed the following question from Otavio Salvador in the discussion
for bug #440161:

> I still fail to understand how i2o_block will work for your device if
> it's not registered for it on pcialias file ... that makes me worry
> about it.

I think the answer to the question is that the i2o_core module also
supports the "0x000e0000" class.  For example, the modules.pcimap file
for our 2.6.18-5-k7 installation includes the following line:

i2o_core             0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0x000e0000 0x00ffff00 0x0


This matches the "I2O" class of the Adaptec 2100S card:
  # lspci -nn
  [...]
  00:0a.1 I2O [0e00]: Adaptec (formerly DPT) SmartRAID V Controller [1044:a501] (rev 02)



Earlier in the thread there was a mention that the following two devices
were listed in modules.pcimap as being supported by i2o_core:
>  1044:a511 dpt_i2o i2o_core
>  8086:1962 i2o_core

I believe these two device ids are listed specifically in order support
two particular types of cards that don't match the 0x0e00 class:

  http://i2o.shadowconnect.com/faq.php#promise
  http://i2o.shadowconnect.com/faq.php#zerochannel

[More specifically, for the Promise card the line from modules.pcimap is:
# pci module         vendor     device     subvendor  subdevice  class      class_mask driver_data
i2o_core             0x00008086 0x00001962 0x0000105a 0xffffffff 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0

, and /usr/share/misc/pci.ids lists that vendor/device/subvendor as as:
---
8086  Intel Corp. 
        [...]
        1962  80960RM [i960RM Microprocessor]
                105a 0000  SuperTrak SX6000 I2O CPU
---

Similarly, the Zero Channel card reports itself as class "0104", according
to "lspci -n" output included at the bottom of

   https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-beta-list/2004-October/msg01321.html

, and so the driver needs to support that specific card by device id. ]


Hope this helps.

						Nathan




Reply to: