On Fri, 2005-10-28 at 16:03 -0700, Andrew Vasquez wrote: > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 02:53:13PM -0700, Andrew Vasquez wrote: > > > > > I'm still in the process of ironing out the .bin distribution details > > > locally, but perhaps once we migrate to firmware-loading exclusively > > > via request_firmware(), the (small?) contigent of 2100 could use the > > > EF variant I referenced above. > > > > You know, I'm in favour of getting firmware images in the kernel image, > > but what's the problem of simply downgrading the 2100 firmware until > > we get rid of the builtin firmware for all qla2xxx variants? > > I have no problems with submitting 1.17.38 EF for inclusion upstream. > My only hope is that for the (other) 2100 user out there that use the > latest 2100 firmware and are not experiencing problems, the downgrade > does not break anything. > > That's another reason I posed the following question: > > > > Could I get another informal count of 2100 users who are still having > > > problems with qla2xxx? > > Perhaps I should also ask: > > Who's running 2100 cards with the latest qla2xxx driver and > are experiencing no problems? Hmm.. I thought qla2xxx driver doesn't like qla2100. I had troubles getting my qla2100 cards to work with qal2xxx (9 months ago) and gave up and using only qla2200 and qla2300 card. Is there a point in me going back and trying qla2100 ? (Ofcourse, I need to locate those cards). Thanks, Badari - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
