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

Re: Adaptec problems with 2.4.6?



Which version of the driver are you using?  The 2.4 series has two Adaptec SCSI drivers:  the old Adaptec SCSI driver, as well as a new 
one.  Check your kernel configs.  The newer driver is known to have a lot of problems, but it's new and being actively maintained.  The old 
driver is pretty stable, but is no longer being developed.  Try switching the Adaptec driver and see if that helps.

Mike

> Hello!
> 
> I'm having some problems with kernel 2.4.6 and an Adaptec AIC-7890
> controller.
> The first one is that it shares the interrupt with the sound card.  This
> should not be an issue, since they are PCI devices, and it never gave any
> problems, except lately, when if I play mp3 and make some heavy activity
> on the SCSI bus (scan a photo, write a CD, havily use the hard disk) while
> playing MP3s, the computer freezes hard.
> 
> Here are the interrupt assignments:
>            CPU0       CPU1
>   0:      89648      80663    IO-APIC-edge  timer
>   1:       4836       4120    IO-APIC-edge  keyboard
>   2:          0          0          XT-PIC  cascade
>   3:       3760       3292    IO-APIC-edge  serial
>   5:          0          0    IO-APIC-edge  SoundBlaster
>   8:          0          1    IO-APIC-edge  rtc
>   9:          0          0    IO-APIC-edge  acpi
>  10:      25675      25669   IO-APIC-level  aic7xxx, EMU10K1
>  11:      97137      96693   IO-APIC-level  usb-uhci, eth0
>  12:       1443       1110    IO-APIC-edge  PS/2 Mouse
>  14:        742        507    IO-APIC-edge  ide0
>  15:     480721     609965    IO-APIC-edge  ide1
> NMI:          0          0
> LOC:     170231     170248
> ERR:          0
> MIS:          0
> 
> 
> The other problem is when I make heavy use of my Plextor CD-R
> drive: here's what happens from time to time:
> 
> Jul 16 23:06:06 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:0:0: Attempting to queue an ABORT message
> Jul 16 23:06:06 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:0:0: Device is active, asserting ATN
> Jul 16 23:06:06 marvin kernel: Recovery code sleeping
> Jul 16 23:06:11 marvin kernel: Recovery code awake
> Jul 16 23:06:11 marvin kernel: Timer Expired
> Jul 16 23:06:11 marvin kernel: aic7xxx_abort returns 8195
> Jul 16 23:06:11 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:6:0: Attempting to queue an ABORT message
> Jul 16 23:06:11 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:6:0: Cmd aborted from QINFIFO
> Jul 16 23:06:11 marvin kernel: aic7xxx_abort returns 8194
> Jul 16 23:06:21 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:6:0: Attempting to queue an ABORT message
> Jul 16 23:06:21 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:6:0: Cmd aborted from QINFIFO
> Jul 16 23:06:21 marvin kernel: aic7xxx_abort returns 8194
> Jul 16 23:06:21 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:0:0: Attempting to queue a TARGET RESET message
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: aic7xxx_dev_reset returns 8195
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: scsi0:0:6:0: Attempting to queue a TARGET RESET message
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: aic7xxx_dev_reset returns 8195
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: Recovery SCB completes
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: Device 0b:00 not ready.
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel:  I/O error: dev 0b:00, sector 984096
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: Device not ready.  Make sure there is a disc in the drive.
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: Device 0b:00 not ready.
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel:  I/O error: dev 0b:00, sector 984096
> Jul 16 23:06:27 marvin kernel: Device not ready.  Make sure there is a disc in the drive.
> 
> With the kernel 2.4.5 I had problems, too, but the system just chose to
> hang forever all disk activity instead of reporting errors.
> 
> Two questions:
> 
>  1) Do some people know something of similar problems?
>  2) Since this is not so debian-specific, is there a more appropriate
>     mailing list to report this?
> 
> 
> TIA, Enrico
> 
> --
> GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini (Unibo) <zinie@cs.unibo.it>
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 
> 




Reply to: