-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
I know I shouldn't do that
I also know someone should do at least compile on cases which affected by
some patch.
# This is a BitKeeper generated patch for the following project:
# Project Name: Linux kernel tree
# This patch format is intended for GNU patch command version 2.5 or higher.
# This patch includes the following deltas:
# ChangeSet 1.538 -> 1.539
# drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7xxx_proc.c 1.9 -> 1.10
#
# The following is the BitKeeper ChangeSet Log
# --------------------------------------------
# 02/06/13 [email protected] 1.539
# Fix two obscure cases in heh aic7xxx
# --------------------------------------------
#
diff -Nru a/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7xxx_proc.c b/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7xxx_proc.c
- --- a/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7xxx_proc.c Thu Jun 13 23:43:23 2002
+++ b/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7xxx_proc.c Thu Jun 13 23:43:23 2002
@@ -282,7 +282,11 @@
sd.sd_CK = SEECK;
sd.sd_DO = SEEDO;
sd.sd_DI = SEEDI;
+#ifdef CONFIG_PCI
have_seeprom = ahc_acquire_seeprom(ahc, &sd);
+#else
+ have_seeprom = 0;
+#endif
}
if (!have_seeprom) {
@@ -306,8 +310,10 @@
sizeof(struct seeprom_config)/2);
ahc_read_seeprom(&sd, (uint16_t *)ahc->seep_config,
start_addr, sizeof(struct seeprom_config)/2);
+#ifdef CONFIG_PCI
if ((ahc->chip & AHC_VL) == 0)
ahc_release_seeprom(&sd);
+#endif
written = length;
}
- --
Paul P 'Stingray' Komkoff 'Greatest' Jr /// (icq)23200764 /// (http)stingr.net
When you're invisible, the only one really watching you is you (my keychain)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iEYEAREDAAYFAj0I9poACgkQyMW8naS07KSyFgCeIaq/qC3CjghpuzZaQZDk+xFk
gbEAn2VYDXsq+VC5lvvgOXCTUTr2DCsa
=g0mm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>I know I shouldn't do that
>I also know someone should do at least compile on cases which affected by
>some patch.
I guess I'm missing some context here.
The patch, on first inspection, appears correct. Unfortunately, finding
machines without PCI busses is getting more and more difficult every day,
but I'll add a build case that disables PCI busses so we catch these kinds
of failures in the future..
Thanks,
Justin
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 02:27:04PM -0600, Justin T. Gibbs wrote:
> >I know I shouldn't do that
> >I also know someone should do at least compile on cases which affected by
> >some patch.
>
> I guess I'm missing some context here.
>
> The patch, on first inspection, appears correct. Unfortunately, finding
> machines without PCI busses is getting more and more difficult every day,
> but I'll add a build case that disables PCI busses so we catch these kinds
> of failures in the future..
Well, without a PCI bus and an onboard aic7xxx controller maybe...
--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
Replying to Justin T. Gibbs:
> I guess I'm missing some context here.
:)
> The patch, on first inspection, appears correct. Unfortunately, finding
> machines without PCI busses is getting more and more difficult every day,
> but I'll add a build case that disables PCI busses so we catch these kinds
> of failures in the future..
Unfortunately, I just have one such machine here ;(
- --
Paul P 'Stingray' Komkoff 'Greatest' Jr /// (icq)23200764 /// (http)stingr.net
When you're invisible, the only one really watching you is you (my keychain)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iEYEAREDAAYFAj0Je5AACgkQyMW8naS07KTklQCfSdoW3LYTOyrx0iUkm3/WnMBs
hp8AoMx0uYc8RmKeYY628xC8RBdfG+H5
=ENeK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In article <[email protected]> you wrote:
>>I know I shouldn't do that
>>I also know someone should do at least compile on cases which affected by
>>some patch.
>
> I guess I'm missing some context here.
>
> The patch, on first inspection, appears correct. Unfortunately, finding
> machines without PCI busses is getting more and more difficult every day,
> but I'll add a build case that disables PCI busses so we catch these kinds
> of failures in the future..
Yes, I noticed this problem also on my 486 with an Adaptec VL host
adapter.
Willing to test any new version ;)
Cheers,
Juri
--
Juri Haberland <[email protected]>