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

Re: [debian-knoppix] Knoppix-light double-detecting SCSI disks



On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 03:17:24PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> The system showing the current problem has the following configuration:

<snip>

I have now been able to reproduce these problems with 2.4.20-ac1, and
three different systems. It is sufficient that the host adapter (I
tried with two different ncr53c8xx based HAs and one adaptec 2940UW)
is present in the system.

With 2.4.20-ac1, the system kernel panics after misdetecting the
drives. The panic can only be seen in expert mode and happens even
when a kernel command line not containing the hda=scsi .. hdh=scsi
parameters is forced into syslinux.cfg.

If devices are present, they are misdetected as well. See this example:

ID   Hardware present   Hardware detected
0    none               ST  0123  456789ABCDEFGHIJ  KLMN
1    IBM Harddisk       IBM Harddisk (correct)
2    none	       	IBM Harddisk (same as ID 1)
3    none		IBM Harddisk (same as ID 2)
4    Plextor CD-ROM	Plextor CD-ROM (correct)
5    Teac CD-R		Teac CD-R (correct)
6    none 		Teac CD-R (same as ID 5)
7    Hostadapter	Teac CD-R (same as ID 5)

I do not suspect that this is a Knoppix problem, since "original"
Knoppix works fine. However, I must be doing something wrong. Can
anybody more familiar with SCSI Emulation please comment?

Do I see it correctly that modyfing my local Knoppix to work without
SCSI emulation is a major endeavour?

Any hints will be appreciated.

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Karlsruhe, Germany |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 721 966 32 15
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 721 966 31 29
_______________________________________________
debian-knoppix mailing list
debian-knoppix@linuxtag.org
http://mailman.linuxtag.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-knoppix


Reply to: