> On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 05:57:49PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >
> > [ cc:ing linux-ide and knowledgeable people ]
> >
> > Borislav/Tejun:
> > Is the 2.6.29 problem the same thing that was fixed recently?
>
> I'll let Tejun answer that one since I don't get an oops. However, now
> that I have an ide-tape hardware here, I do get something DMA-related
> failing during boot ...
> :
> and more specifically the bad DMA info in identify block thing above. I
> haven't looked into it yet but its next on my TODO.
Cool.
> > Should I just push commit 1e75540ec5202cae63cd238c86bd880e3d496546
> > ("ide-tape: remove back-to-back REQUEST_SENSE detection") to Linus
> > or there is more needed to bring ide-tape to the world of living?
>
> The oops will probably fixed the above commit. I don't have much idea
> about the DMA problem on 2.6.24 tho. But even with the above commit
> fixed, I doubt it would work. The buffer allocation code is broken
> and reliably triggered OOM on my test machine. While trying to locate
> the bug, I realized the complex code didn't do much good to begin with
> and just stripped it down, so I didn't actually tracked down the
> actual bug && the patch to simplify buffer management is way too large
> for 2.6.29, so unless someone is willing to hunt down the bug just for
> 2.6.29, we're kind of stuck. :-(
So I take it that 2.6.30 (or one of the RCs) is worth trying (at least in so
far as preventing the oops on boot)?
> ... and I'm afraid we'll have to do some serious bugfixing since this
> driver is behaving really funny :). Stay tuned, I'm on it.
Ok, I'll keep an eye out for updates. Presumedly we're talking 2.6.31 or
.32 here.
Regards
jonathan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
