Bug 107468
| Summary: | change some driver mapping | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Raw Hide | Reporter: | acount closed by user <a1459440> |
| Component: | hwdata | Assignee: | Bill Nottingham <notting> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 1.0 | CC: | davej, rvokal |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Enhancement | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2003-11-02 20:14:57 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
acount closed by user
2003-10-18 18:19:51 UTC
The drivers don't have one-to-one mappings of what IDs they handle. sym53c8xx_2 is the substitute of the old drivers (sym53c8xx and ncr53c8xx) and it handles all these SCSI HBA: (NCR 0x1000) SYM53C810 0x0001 SYM53C810AP 0x0005 SYM53C815 0x0004 SYM53C820 0x0002 SYM53C825 0x0003 SYM53C860 0x0006 SYM53C875 0x000f SYM53C875_2 0x008f SYM53C885 0x000d SYM53C895 0x000c SYM53C896 0x000b SYM53C895A 0x0012 SYM53C875A 0x0013 LSI53C1010 0x0020 LSI53C1010_2 0x0021 LSI53C1510D 0x000a In the case where there are multiple drivers for the same chip, we only change the default driver to what is recommended by the on-staff kernel maintainers. Any such change is not happening at *this* stage of Fedora Core 1. In 2.6, the driver name is sym53c8xx. At that point we'll need a migration entry for ncr53c8xx, but that's it. Forget FC 1, it's closed. This change is oriented to FC 2. And don't be so optimistic, 2.6 kernel has a long path to be stable ;-). I think sym53c8xx_2 is preferred in 2.4 over ncr53c8xx/sym53c8xx. what do rh kernel hackers believe? -thanks- Asking them. we prefer the 1 version actually for the hw it supports in 2.4. In 2.6 it's different story, so hopefully for FC2. |