Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 08 Sep 2001 00:51:32 +0200 | From | (Frank Schneider) | Subject | Re: AIC + RAID1 error? (was: Re: aic7xxx errors) |
| |
"Justin T. Gibbs" schrieb: > > >Okay, I had it again today: > > You need to be running with aic7xxx=verbose for these messages to be > useful. In the 6.2.2 driver release I've turned these messages on > by default.
Could you please shortly explain what this option does...(before it fills my logfiles with notes "succesfully wrote 1 Byte to disk abc"..:-) i had recently also some problems with aic7xxx, but they where due to a misconfigured scsi-bus and perhaps a bad drive (is still under test), so i enabled scsi error logging in the kernel (2.4.3, RH7.1) and by sending the following strings to /proc/scsi/scsi:
/bin/echo "scsi log error 5" > /proc/scsi/scsi /bin/echo "scsi log mlqueue 3" > /proc/scsi/scsi /bin/echo "scsi log hlcomplete 1" > /proc/scsi/scsi /bin/echo "scsi log scan 5" > /proc/scsi/scsi
But it did not give me that kind of info i wanted to see...does the "aic7xxx=verbose" something similar or something completly different ? > >Kernel was 2.4.9ac9 with (new) AIC driver 6.2.1, compiled with "Maximum > >Number of TCQ Commands per Device" set to 64. > > This is 8 times the tag load the old driver defaults to.
Thats true, and e.g., my relatively new IBM-drives (DGHS18V, 2x DNES-309170W, DDRS-39130W, all Server-disks according to IBM) can only 64...and the kernel complains, if i compile it with 255 and locks to 64...as i have played with this feature a while ago, i did not realize a big performance-plus from 8 to 64, so i switched to 32...and i would go down to <8 if i where in doubt....
> >So I compiled the same kernel with the old AIC driver and it works fine.
Test it longer and under load...i also "cured" a bad scsi-bus by switching drivers one time...sometimes it really seems to work...for some days...:-) > Which may be due to a lighter load on the drive. Its hard to say without > the verbose messages and the full dmesg for the machine. You're IBM drive > may be running the "if I miss a seek, I fall off the bus" firmware where > the bug is only triggered under high load. Send the dmesg output and we'll > see.
Solong... Frank.
-- Frank Schneider, <SPATZ1@T-ONLINE.DE>. Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ... -.- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |