On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:40:26AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 08:10:12AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > I've done a little poking of my own at sysfs based on the comments in > > > the yaird code. I can confirm that it is possible for a PCI IDE driver > > > to be listed as associated with a PCI device without actually being the > > > driver used to access the device. This happens on my alpha, where > > > ide-generic must be used due to bugs in the cmd64x driver, yet running > > > modprobe cmd64x does show this driver associated with the PCI device: > > > > $ ls -l /sys/devices/pci0000\:00/0000\:00\:0b.0/driver > > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2006-03-09 19:46 > > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:0b.0/driver -> > > > ../../../bus/pci/drivers/CMD64x_IDE > > > Mmm. When this was happening, could you use and mount partition on this > > device ? > > And when doing so, do you know which of ide-generic or cmd64x would be used > > to > > read the drive ? > > Are you suggesting that loading cmd64x has changed which driver is > associated with /dev/hda, even though the machine has partitions mounted > from it at the time?
No, i am wondering what /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:0b.0/driver was pointing too previous to cm64x being loaded. It seems strange to me that it will not point to what is actually used. Maybe you could just give a ls -l output of the device and block pointers to the module, in all possible cases ( only cmd64x or ide-generic loaded, both loaded in both order) ? > > And again, is the right thing to do here, not to fix those cmd64x bugs ? > > Um, that's completely missing the point. The point of this exercise was to > try to rule out a possible explanation for the yaird workaround. Which I > did. He, ... BTW, did you see Jurij's post, which tracked back all those trouble to the recently dropped Herbert-Xu-modular-ide patch ? > > > However, /sys/block/hda/device still points to the right place, and it's > > > my > > > understanding that /sys/block is what yaird walks, so this still is no > > > explanation for how someone could have mis-identified a bug in this area. > > > How does it find the device and then the driver starting from block ? > > $ readlink /sys/block/hda/device > ../../devices/ide0/0.0 This is the ide-generic node, right ? > So we should expect yaird to only load ide-generic on this system, since > cmd64x, while loaded, is not associated with the root device (according to > sysfs or otherwise). Seems logical, i still wonder aboutthe device driver link above, since it somehow says that cm64x is responsible for this device. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
