CentOS 4.2 for alpha

[Pasi Pirhonen]

Hi,


On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 04:45:46PM -0400, Jay Estabrook wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 06:02:15PM -0400, Jay Estabrook wrote:
> > 
> > Installed from CD very easily on an LX164.
> > 
> > Currently in the midst of an NFS install to a DS25, which looks good
> > as well...
> 
> Completed just fine on the DS25, though I haven't run the SMP kernel
> for any significant time.
> 


I've ran the SMP myself quite extensively. I do make it one of primary
requirements having SMP hardware available when even thinking making
something public. 


> Further successes include:
> 
> 	MIATA/PWS (EV56 @ 600MHZ)
> 	XP1000 (EV67 @ 667MHz)
> 
> I noticed that the "qlogicisp" driver is being used for the QLogic SCSI
> controllers.
> 
> The AC-1.0 kernel (albeit 2.6.11-based) is using the enhanced qla1280 driver
> now, as we benefit from the work of someone who ported that driver to support
> the earlier 1020/1040 controllers. That driver (qla1280) is much preferred
> over the older (non-maintained) "qlogicisp".
> 
> So, is "qlogicisp" the only driver that supports 1020/1040 that is in
> 2.6.9, or is this just an oversight?
> 

At least on AlphaStation 255/233, where i have one of these 

SCSI storage controller: QLogic Corp. ISP1020 Fast-wide SCSI (rev 05)

the qla1280 isn't even working. I am forced to use qlogicisp and even
that does barf 

ERROR: SCSI host 	sp1020' has no error handling
ERROR: This is not a safe way to run your SCSI host
ERROR: The error handling must be added to this driver
fffffc001fe13d38 fffffffc00225580 fffffc00012547a8 fffffffc00225f00 
       fffffc0000729a40 fffffffc00225fe0 0000000000000000 000000001d244b3c 
       0000000000000000 000000000000000a fffffc000137108b 0000000000000000 
       0000000000000000 fffffc001fe13da0 fffffc001fe13da0 fffffc0001832868 
       000000001d244b3c 0000000000000000 000000000000000a fffffc000137108b 
       0000000000000000 0000000000000000 fffffffc0021ba20 fffffffc00225f00 
Trace:
[<fffffc00012547a8>] scsi_register+0x28/0xb0
[<fffffc00010ac0f4>] sys_open+0xa4/0xf0
[<fffffc00010d68f4>] dput+0x104/0x660
[<fffffc000106e024>] sys_init_module+0x2c4/0x530
[<fffffc00010140d4>] entSys+0xa4/0xc0
[<fffffc0001014030>] entSys+0x0/0xc0

On boot, but does work like a champ after that.
I do believe that was the case with AlphaCore 2.6.11 kernel too as i've
actually re.installed that box back Jun when i made the 'beta release
with AlphaCore kernel'. I didn't even have my 2.6.9 work done by then,
so i've rolled that in later.


If i think CentOS-4/alpha, the inetntion is to make it use as much as
possible the upstream codebase, including kernel, but it might be
impossible for long term. I don't mind rolling in/testing some much
recent kernel and put that on centosplus repository (we use that repo
for stuff which is out of upstream).

The good thing IMO is that community is actively working on this again
(in context of RPM based Linux for alpha). I don't personally expect
thing to be qute mature until some U3/U4 time, which would be like one
mode year or so. That should leave quite few years of usability time
then for people like me, who are lazy on major updates (i do still run
my very first debian installation which was some 9.5 years ago. I've
just updated it from net all over again as i am really lazy to start
over :).



-- 
Pasi Pirhonen - upi at iki.fi - http://iki.fi/upi/