Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1999-37,: Re: Adaptec 1542 and kernel 2.2.11&12 not working?

# Re: Adaptec 1542 and kernel 2.2.11&12 not working?

tommiy (tommiy@ozemail.com.au)
Sun, 12 Sep 1999 08:10:08 +1000

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Andrea Arcangeli: "[patch] 2.3.18-ac1 ramdisk fixes"
- Previous message: Jakub Jelinek: "[PATCH] ntohl/htonl prototype in kernel headers"

Chris (and Alan and Andries),
I'm not sure from your last message if you are saying the code is right
or wrong (and as I have a deadline for work tomorrow I haven't got the
time to find out myself), but in the end I just changed the iobase
address in the code to match what mine was and everything is sweet
again.

#if defined(MODULE)
int aha1542[] = { 0x334, 11, 4, -1 };
MODULE_PARM(aha1542, "1-4i");
#endif

I didn't try doing a modprobe with the parameters (or did I it was late
last night) but I did try booting and passing the parameters to lilo etc
and it appeared that it was plainly ignored.

I found someone else complaining of this way back in late august I'll
have to track him down and tell him the answer as well.

Thanks for the quick replies guys much appreciated and hope its fixed
next time around... ;)

"Chris D. Faulhaber" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 11 Sep 1999 Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote:
>
> >
> > tommiy@ozemail.com.au writes:
> >
> > : I have an old aha1542 card thats driving a sony dat drive, with all the
> > : scsi options set for module and under kernel 2.2.9 everything works
> > : fine.
> > : However, if I use kernel 2.2.11 or 2.2.12 then it will not find the
> > : scsi card at boot time and I cannot convince it to find it at all using
> > : modprobe or insmod.
> > I am not surprised - patch-2.2.11 contains a very strange patch
> > on aha1542.c by Chris Faulhaber. Maybe it somehow was munged.
> > Anyway, the easiest is to just revert it.
> >
>
> Thank you for the insult. I appreciate that considering I've never been
> in contact with you.
>
> > (Let us look at the patch:
> >
> > +#ifdef MODULE
> > + bases[0] = 4;
> > + bases[1] = aha1542[0];
> > + bases[2] = aha1542[1];
> > + bases[3] = aha1542[2];
> > + bases[4] = aha1542[3];
> > +#endif
> >
> > and the declaration of bases:
> >
> > #define MAXBOARDS 2
> > static unsigned int bases[MAXBOARDS]={0x330, 0x334};
> >
>
> Yeah, that was just an initial [second] quick hack...it appears that the
> wrong version got patched in (ver 2, not 3).
>
> > So, it seems this will scribble on memory past bases.
> > Also: bases[] contains the addresses being probed for.
> > But the patch has
> >
> > +#if defined(MODULE)
> > +int aha1542[] = { 0x330, 11, 4, -1 };
> > +MODULE_PARM(aha1542, "1-4i");
> > +#endif
> >
> > numbers that do not look like bases at all.
> > Maybe this was copied from some other driver and happened to do
> > what the patcher wanted?)
>
> That is correct...the bases[x]= above is not...
>
> My intention was to put the insmod variables into bases[0],
> setup_buson[0], setup_busoff[0], and setup_dmaspeed[0] so it would be
> probed first...and if no variables, the above values (aha1542[] = { 0x330,
> 11, 4, -1 }) would be default.
>
> -----
> Chris D. Faulhaber <jedgar@fxp.org> | All the true gurus I've met never
> System/Network Administrator, | claimed they were one and always
> Reality Check Information, Inc. | pointed to someone better.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Andrea Arcangeli: "[patch] 2.3.18-ac1 ramdisk fixes"
- Previous message: Jakub Jelinek: "[PATCH] ntohl/htonl prototype in kernel headers"