Management interface for cards powered by the "mfi" driver?
stefan.lambrev at moneybookers.com
Wed Jun 18 14:48:13 UTC 2008
Ruben van Staveren wrote:
> On 18 Jun 2008, at 16:07, Stefan Lambrev wrote:
>>> Last time I checked it was still 2.6.12. it still is set to that
>>> value on our 2950's (running 6.2 and linux_base-fc-4_9)
>> I never saw 2.6.12 in documentation, but you may be right. Tough in
>> ports/UPDATING only 2.6.16 is mention.
>> speaks also only for 2.6.16 :)
> I got this from reading the commit message of r1.5 of
> I don't know what the change set between 2.6.12 and 2.6.16 is
> regarding the linuxolator. As I see it the difference should only in
> more syscalls being supported. So if megacli has enough to get going
> on by setting it to just 2.6.12 it should not have a requirement for
> 2.6.16. Correct me if I am wrong (and I'll fix the instructions in the
Yes that's correct, so the sanity check should be >= 2.6.12, not just
equal to 2.6.12?
> Of course, if you think mfi(4) should support your board csup up to
> the latest stable and see whether it works. Also run through
> /usr/local/sbin/megacli instead of /usr/local/libexec/MegaCli as it
> will perform some sanity checks.
I do not have problems with mfi and megacli ;) It's the OP who have them.
>>> People should only realise that they are running a linux binary
>>> under emulation in order to manage their mission critical servers.
>>> It is a thing you might not like.
>> It has been always this way with lsi ? Actually the difference now is
>> that we are forced to use tools under beta/experimental linuxolator ;)
> Sad but true. But I managed with ease to replace a hot spare not that
> long ago.
> You might want to have a peek at the cheat sheet hosted at
nice site :)
More information about the freebsd-stable