Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 Oct 1996 20:31:53 -0500 (EST)
From:      Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
To:        eischen@vigrid.com, ponds!freefall.freebsd.org!freebsd-hackers, ponds!ponds!rivers
Subject:   Re: AHA2940UW differences with 2.1.5-STABLE.
Message-ID:  <199610290131.UAA00320@lakes.water.net>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> > I've just installed 2.1.5-STABLE (by grabbing the sys
> > directory from freefall.cdrom.com and rebuilding a kernel)
> > on a machine with an AHA 2940UW.
> >
> > I noticed a lit of changes to the aic7xxx code since 2.1.5R.
> >
> > I've also noticed a difference in how the two operate.  I don't
> > know if this is good, or bad, just different.
> >
> > 2.1.5R reports my SCSI devices as (from an older /var/log/messages, this is
> > going to be "wide" - so expand your window :-) ):
> [...]
> >   Oct 20 21:33:41 lakes /kernel: (ahc0:1:0): "MICROP 1548-15MZ1077802 HZ2P" type 0 fixed SCSI 1
> >   Oct 20 21:33:41 lakes /kernel: sd1(ahc0:1:0): Direct-Access 1635MB (3349512 512 byte sectors)
> >   Oct 20 21:33:41 lakes /kernel: ahc0:A:2: refuses WIDE negotiation.  Using 8bit transfers
> >   Oct 20 21:33:42 lakes /kernel: ahc0:A:2: refuses syncronous negotiation.  Using asyncronous transfers
> >   Oct 20 21:33:42 lakes /kernel: (ahc0:2:0): "WANGTEK 5150ES SCSI FA23 08" type 1 removable SCSI 1
> 
> > You'll notice here that the "MICROP 1548-15MZ1077802 HZ2P" does not
> > negotiate WIDE data paths.  This is correct, as this is an ancient
> > SCSI I drive (from about 1989.)
> >
> > My question is - is this part of the improvements in 2.1.5-STABLE?
> 
> If you have enable Wide negotiation set in SCSI Select Utilities,
> then it will attempt wide negotiation.  Look at your tape drive
> above; you must have wide data transfers set in SCSI Select for
> the tape drive too.  If you disable wide data transfers in SCSI
> Select Utilities for the Micropolis and the Wangetk, then you
> can get rid of both messages ;-)
> 

 Well, yes - that's true...
 
 But, my point was that 2.1.5-STABLE acts differently than 2.1.5-RELEASE
on the same hardware with the exactly the same configuration.

 My question is - is that "on purpose" (i.e. related to the aic7xxx fixes), 
or is something else lurking around here...

	- Dave R. -



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610290131.UAA00320>