From owner-freebsd-stable  Fri Jun 14 11:19:04 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA04755
          for stable-outgoing; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 11:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NS.Contrib.Com (NS.Contrib.Com [194.77.12.2])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA04732;
          Fri, 14 Jun 1996 11:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from src@localhost) by NS.Contrib.Com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id UAA13489; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:18:51 +0200
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:18:51 +0200
From: Heiko Blume <src@NS.Contrib.Com>
Message-Id: <199606141818.UAA13489@NS.Contrib.Com>
To: davidg@Root.COM
CC: gibbs@freefall.freebsd.org, john@ulantris.infinop.com, bill@twwells.com,
        stable@FreeBSD.ORG, bde@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: <199606140445.VAA03835@Root.COM> (message from David Greenman on Thu, 13 Jun 1996 21:45:16 -0700)
Subject: Re: adaptec disk controllers and 2.1-RELEASE
Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>>>>> "David" == David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM> writes:

    >>> putc to a clist with no reserved cblocks
    >>> putc to a clist with no reserved cblocks
    >>> putc to a clist with no reserved cblocks
    >>> putc to a clist with no reserved cblocks
    >>> 
    >>> btw, what are those last four ones? never seen
    >>> before.
    >> 
    >> I don't know.  I think that DavidG wrote our clist code??

    David>    Yes, I wrote it. Bruce revamped/extended the clist reservation code,
    David> however - the reservation stuff I originally wrote was far too inadequate
    David> for the job. I haven't seen the above diagnostic for probably close to a
    David> year, and I'm surprised to see it pop up now. There haven't been any changes
    David> to the code involved in this for a long time (>6 months), so it seems likely
    David> that the problem is exposed by a change in activity on that system rather
    David> than by a code change.
    David>    The diagnostic message is generally not a problem, but it does indicate
    David> a software problem that is most likely related to doing serial I/O to a
    David> port after it has been closed. ...this kind of problem generally falls into
    David> Bruce's domain. Bruce?

i should add that these came on a serial console right after boot.

the sun cu that is the console :-) looses carrier when the
serial is reset, so it possibly is related to serial.

can't see any bad consequences, tho.

hb