Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 18:32:26 -0400 (EDT) From: "James O'Kane" <jo2y@justresearch.com> To: aic7xxx@freebsd.org Cc: Karl Kleinpaste <karl@justresearch.com>, Erik Miller <ewm@justresearch.com> Subject: 2940UW problems. Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9906162029330.25741-100000@thelia.jprc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I hope this list is for linux and freebsd and that I'm not asking the wrong people. CC me on any related reply as I'm not currently subscribed. It seems that we have been having trouble with a 2940UW card with linux, and it is our best guess that it is being sent too many requests and one is being dropped by someone, the drivers get confused and reset the bus and start over again. The errors that we get are similar to the following, but we would have these errors on 3 different 2940 cards, 3 different machines, 3 different classes of machines, PPro, PII, P200. ---error---- Jun 16 18:07:08 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:2:-1) Unexpected busfree, LASTPHASE = 0 xa0, SEQADDR = 0x155 Jun 16 18:07:08 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:2:0) No active SCB for reconnecting tar get - Issuing BUS DEVICE RESET. Jun 16 18:07:08 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:2:0) SAVED_TCL=0x20, ARG_1=0xff, SEQADDR=0xfc Jun 16 18:07:12 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:2:0) Synchronous at 40.0 Mbyte/sec, off set 8. Jun 16 18:07:12 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:4:0) Synchronous at 40.0 Mbyte/sec, off set 8. Jun 16 18:07:12 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:3:0) Synchronous at 40.0 Mbyte/sec, off set 8. Jun 16 18:07:13 server9 kernel: (scsi1:0:5:0) Synchronous at 40.0 Mbyte/sec, off set 8. ---end error--- There are also often time a SCSI abort and timeout while resetting the bus, but those didn't make it into the error logs. In doing some searches on www.deja.com I noticed that some people suggested putting no_reset in the lilo config, but that doesn't seem to be a solution the way it's presented, it only seems to hide the symptoms. While looking at /proc/scsi/aic7xxx/1 we noticed that it contained this line: SCBs: Active 0, Max Active 4, I don't claim to totally understand SCB's, but our theory is that our software (raid 5) is producing more SCB's than the drivers are setup for and one is getting lost by someone. Is there a reason that the max active is 4? This chain has 5 drives on it. Is it safe to increase the SCB max value or are we guessing wrong at the problem? thanks -james James O'Kane -- Linux Administrator |If only /usr/sbin/sendmail Justsystem Pittsburgh Research Center |could do your taxes... 4616 Henry Street | Pittsburgh, PA 15213 | (412) 683-4095 | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe aic7xxx" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.05.9906162029330.25741-100000>