[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A1D9EC2.4090602@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 16:12:50 -0400
From: jim owens <jowens@...com>
To: "Miller, Mike (OS Dev)" <Mike.Miller@...com>
CC: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@...bisoft.de>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
"viro@...IV.linux.org.uk" <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
"rjw@...k.pl" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk" <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
"shemminger@...tta.com" <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
Subject: Re: Analyzed/Solved/Bisected: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow
Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote:
>>> Finally, today I built the ccsii driver into the kernel.
>> It was previously modularized and loaded from initrd. The
>> second "sysfs" line went away. But does this make cciss
>> guilty? It is now loaded about 2 seconds earlier in the boot
>> sequence, which is a big change in timing I guess.
>>> Enlighten me :-)
>> No idea what is going on, but since I saw your May 20
>> message, I have been trying to wake up someone whose day job
>> it should be to care about dl380s and smartarrays. :)
>
> What? I know Martin has pinged me in the past, but I do not think it was about this issue. If there's multiple sysfs entries for cciss I can't explain that offhand. We do little to nothing for sysfs in the driver.
> Had something similiar happen recently where "/" changed to "!". Had do to with our nested directory structure, /dev/cciss/name vs /dev/name. But we did not make that change, either.
It was not you that I was trying to get to look at this...
but now that I have your attention :)
I did not think it pointed at cciss or the sysfs entry as
being the problem. I was wondering more about platform probe
timing, the bios, and how each card firmware reacts given
what I thought the patch did. I could be totally wrong about
that as I work at the filesystem level.
We have not seen the problem yet but we have different
proliants/smartarrays.
If you can try it on matching hardware, great, if not
then someone will eventually find a system to test it.
jim
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists