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

Order of loading for modules 3w-xxxx and aic-7xxx has changed {Scanned}



Hello,

Background
==========

  We have a Server that is fitted with one:

      Escalade 3Ware 7500-8 RAID card,
      (set as RAID 5 with some Maxtor IDE disks)

  and one:

      Adaptec 29160 SCSI card
      (hosting two off SCSI disks)

  (I know its a bit of a strange configuration but we inherited
   the two SCSI disks and it seemed a shame not to use them).

  When the upgrade to kernel-image-2.4.18-1-686 (2.4.18-13.1) was
  carried out a couple of weeks ago, the order in which the
  modules 3w-xxxx and aic-7xxx loaded had been reversed compared
  with the order in the previous kernel image.  In the
  2.4.18-13.1 image, the 3w-xxxx driver comes up first and the
  RAID array is sda.  Then the aic-7xxx driver comes up and the
  true SCSI disks are then sdb and sdc.  This is great as this is
  the order I want.

  With the previous kernel I tried entering the following at the
  LILO prompt:

     Linux append="scsihosts=3w-xxxx:aic7xxx"

  but I couldn't get it to work.  The aic7xxx driver was always
  loaded first so the two true scsi disks were sda & sdb, the
  3w-xxxx driver was next and the RAID array was named sdc.


Problem
=======
  Having looked through the documentation and searched the
  archives I can find nothing to say that with
  kernel-image-2.4.18-1-686 (2.4.18-13.1) users should note the
  order of loading for modules 3w-xxxx and aic-7xxx has changed
  around compared with that of the previous kernel image.

  Q:  Is this change a documented anywhere?
  Q:  Is this change likely to become a permanent feature? :-))


Aside
=====
  (I had considered trying something with disk labels and devfs
  to work around the order in which drivers were loaded but as
  far as I can ascertain devfs is being deprecated in 2.6 kernels
  so this didn't seem like a good way forwards).

Jo.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.



Reply to: