xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FW: Suggestions on Emulex Driver build w XFS

To: "Matt Avila" <mavila@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: FW: Suggestions on Emulex Driver build w XFS
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 13:52:26 +0100
In-reply-to: <004101c1803e$bc897fe0$c8010a0a@lightning>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 18:19 8-12-2001 -0500, Matt Avila wrote:
> All,
>
> I've been following this discussion group for some time and am
> currently running kernel 2.4.9-13 w/ XFS 1.0.2 on an Intel board/CPU
> combo. I've also installed dual Emulex LP8000's that will be AL_PA
> connected to storage in the interim. Ill be moving these to FC_SW in
> the near future.
>
> My questions are I have a few choices in building the driver (for the
> fibre cards) either as a standalone module or to install it under the
> /usr/src/linux kernel subtree. Any suggestions on "best practices" for
> configuring this with XFS? Anyway, I've got a bit more than 1/2 TB
> that I'm just itching to format & run with.

Binary drivers are dangerous waters and upgrading your kernel may suddenly break the driver or the kernel and produce dataloss, lockups and corruption.

Looking at what adaptec did with their raid solution which is found onboard of a lot of prefab servers and goes by the name of aacraid. Better avoid that. People have seen a myriad of problems in the past and even today when some boxes still die under heavy load.

Alan Cox has just made a real linux driver for these cards which after some testing by people shows that even at 0.9.2 the card survives all forms of crashtesting which is something incredible for a complete rewrite. I have no word on the performance yet. We officially scrapped these cards 1 month after purchase of the machine and used a card with a driver that was generally available and working.

I suspect that if you go the closed binary path it will be full of bumps and potholes. A risk that I am not willing to take.

Cheers
--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>