[4298] in linux-scsi channel archive
SV: Upgraded to 2.1.107 ... almost succesfully - Follow up.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brian Schau)
Mon Jul 6 12:54:38 1998
From: Brian Schau <bsc@fleggaard.dk>
To: "'linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu'" <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>,
"'linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu'" <linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 18:42:53 +0200
SCSI:
Inserted a 2 CPU-addon board. The server hung, with a messages saying:
scsi ..... - trying harder.
We removed the scsi devices on the adaptec host, and the machine booted,
still getting the "bad scbptr" and so on.
Questions: Are there problems with the adaptec-driver in 2.1.107? Are
there problems with the scsi-driver in 2.1.107?
Best regards,
Brian
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: Brian Schau [SMTP:bsc@fleggaard.dk]
> Sendt: 6. juli 1998 18:21
> Til: 'linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu'; 'linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu'
> Emne: Upgraded to 2.1.107 ... almost succesfully.
>
> Hi,
>
>
> To all who responded to my request for help on upgrading to 2.1.107.
> Especially thanks to Alan - your reply rocks, it wasn't necessary to
> go
> all the way!
>
> I just compiled and rebooted my new 2.1.107 kernel. It almost went
> smooth ...
>
>
> 1) MODULES: When doing a 'depmod -a' it complains about 'unresolved
> symbols'. I guess upgrading to modutils-2.1.something will help?
> (Ok, silly question).
>
> 2) IO-APIC: I found this in the boot-log:
>
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: init IO_APIC IRQs
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: IO-APIC pin 0broken BIOS, changing pin
> 11
> to edge
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: broken BIOS, changing pin 12 to edge
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: broken BIOS, changing pin 15 to edge
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: not connected.
>
> ... I've never seen IO-APIC's reports before, so I am a bit worried
> about 'broken BIOS' & 'not connected'. What do they mean? Do I
> need
> to worry?
>
> 3) SCSI: I also get these on 2.0.34:
>
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: (scsi0:-1:-1:-1) Bad scbptr 255 during
> SELTO.
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: (scsi0:-1:-1:-1) Referenced SCB 255 not
> valid during SELTO.
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: SCSISEQ = 0x12 SEQADDR = 0x9
> SSTAT0
> = 0x15 SSTAT1 = 0x88
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: (scsi1:-1:-1:-1) Bad scbptr 255 during
> SELTO.
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: (scsi1:-1:-1:-1) Referenced SCB 255 not
> valid during SELTO.
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: SCSISEQ = 0x12 SEQADDR = 0x9
> SSTAT0
> = 0x15 SSTAT1 = 0x88
>
> ... but this time the server doesn't crash - T H A N K S! (BTW: what
> does the errors mean? They make the kernel panic ... Is it bad
> hardware?)
>
> 4) RPC: nfs/mount needs to be upgraded. But why does RPC complain?
>
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: nfs warning: mount version older than
> kernel
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: portmap: RPC call returned error 111
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: RPC: task of released request still
> queued!
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: RPC: (task is on xprt_pending)
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: portmap: RPC call returned error 111
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: RPC: task of released request still
> queued!
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: RPC: (task is on xprt_pending)
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: lockd_up: makesock failed, error=-111
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: portmap: RPC call returned error 111
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: RPC: task of released request still
> queued!
> Jul 6 17:46:01 enjoy linux: RPC: (task is on xprt_pending)
> Jul 6 17:46:10 enjoy fspool[290]: started
> Jul 6 17:46:10 enjoy fspool[290]: faxmachine: rlis3.fleggaard.dk
> Jul 6 17:46:10 enjoy fspool[290]: root: /home
> Jul 6 17:46:10 enjoy fspool[290]: running
>
> 5) In 2.0.33-days I had this line in my /etc/login.defs, which allows
> me
> to access files > 1Gb:
>
> ULIMIT 4194304
>
> ... if I put this in my /etc/login.defs, the fs complains when copying
> even small files (<1K!) from filesystem to filesystem. Setting the
> ULIMIT to the default-value (2097152) "almost" solves the problem - I
> can create/copy files up to 1Gb, but I can't create/copy files >1Gb.
> How do I express 'unlimited' in ULIMIT?
>
>
>
> Rodger Donaldson: you've heard about Unifix. When 2.1.107 boots, it
> tells you in nice letter: "POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX" ...
> it's the same firm ;o)
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Brian ("crossing my fingers that the upgrade to 4 CPU's will be as
> smooth as the upgrade to 2.1.107 ..." ;o)
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
