Re: irq timeouts - CDROM
Yes you (Gary) are right the problem happens cosistently with some cd's but far infrequently with others. What catches my intrest is that this did not occur with Red Hat . Are the cdrom drivers different between the two dristibutions ? From dmesg I notice that Debian used "Uniform CD driver revision 3.11" I don't remember if
Red Hat used a different one. I had thought that CD-ROM support was built into the kernel itself. In any case I wonder if it would be possible to use red hat drivers with debian. Though I am begining to love Debian for its size, do-it-yourself philosophy and the co-operative user base, the red hat driver was certainly better in that I was able to read some defective cd's too, that I just can't mount in debian.
sincerely
balbir thomas
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 08:48:00PM -0500, Gary Mulder wrote:
>
> Most Pentium based systems have two EIDE buses. Normally if you have one hard
> drive and one CDROM drive you'll have each as the master device on each bus.
> This would result in the devices /dev/hda and /dev/hdc.
>
> This is optimal as the EIDE protocol only allows one device at a time to be
> active on each EIDE bus and CDROM I/O operations are very slow. If a second hard
> drive and / or CDROM are installed they should be configured each as slave
> devices on the bus with the other like device. They would then show up as
> /dev/hdb (EIDE channel 1) and /dev/hdd (EIDE channel 2).
>
> On the original topic - does it consistentely occur with only some CDs or any
> CD? Some CDROM drives / ATAPI drivers have problems reading some CDROMS,
> especially "extra capacity" (also known something like 700MB) CDs. Results can
> be very inconsistent between drives, drivers and CDs. If it *is* consistent and
> you're using the same ATAPI driver as you were using under Redhat (not sure how
> you'd check...) I'd guess the CDROM drive is going bad.
>
> Gary
>
> Balbir Thomas wrote:
>
> > Correct me if I am wrong . The CDROM is a slave to the primary IDE drive so I would expect it would be hdb.
> >
> > sincerely
> > Balbir
>
Reply to: