|   | 
      | 
  
  
      | 
      | 
  
 
     | 
    | 
  
  
     | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
      | 
  
  
    | 
         
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] Basic Xen Question
 
That sounds like my IBM ServeRaid 7.  I don't know much about the 8, do you know what the adaptec equivalent is?  I think mine is the 2410SA, and that uses the aacraid module.
 
 On 5/17/06, 
Julius Spencer <julius@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yeah,  unfortunately no. I think it is one of the few that isn't, from Adaptec (my luck!). It's module name is: adpahci ; I haven't found this anywhere except as Suse and RHEL rpms.
  If you have heard of it though, do let me know. It's the Adaptec
 HostRAID (IBM ServeRAID-8e) embedded in the motherboard.
   From what I've read it's fakeraid, but at least it must deliver some resources which would have been nice... Plus there's a sweet IBM application which lets you manage and monitor the RAID (if it can find
 the controller via the OS).
 
 
  Greg Cockburn wrote: > Are you sure the adaptec driver is not in the kernel.  I have adaptec to > be very good, in terms of opening up their drives. I have not come
 > across one that wasn't already in the kernel. > > I have used SCSI and SATA Controllers and RAID variants of each without > getting any drivers from adaptec. > > Greg. > > On 5/17/06, *Petersson, Mats* <
Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx > <mailto:Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx>> wrote: > > > >      > -----Original Message-----
 >      > From: Julius Spencer [mailto:julius@xxxxxxxxx >     <mailto:julius@xxxxxxxxx>] >      > Sent: 16 May 2006 21:23
 >      > To: Petersson, Mats >      > Cc: Sylvain Coutant; xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >     <mailto:
xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >      > Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Basic Xen Question >      > >      > Hi, >      > >      > Thanks for the reply! >      > >      > Essentially I have a binary driver. There are only  a few
 >      > OS's which it works under. Unfortunately IBM say that they >      > don't have much 'swing' in getting their suppliers to open >      > source the driver and Adaptec seem to have made it impossible
 >      > to make contact with them unless you have bought >      >   from them directly. >      > >      > If I could patch the kernel which comes with the distro so it >      > was "xenified" ( :) ) then perhaps I could continue to use
 >      > the same driver. >      > >      > In this case, as it is a RAID type of device I'll have to opt >      > to use software RAID. >      > >      > Thank you again for the reply.
 > >     Unfortunately in this type of situation, I'm not sure you'd get much >     help by using an older kernel - the driver may well not behave itself >     well enough to still work under Xen... At least, I think that is still a
 >     problem in Xenified Linux as it is under HVM - drivers in Xenified >     Linux >     are modified to "understand" Xen, and that's not going to work with >     binary drivers. However, I may be wrong. Someone with better
 >     understanding of this may be able to correct me (or say I'm right). > >     -- >     Mats >      > >      > Petersson, Mats wrote: >      > > >      > >
 >      > >> -----Original Message----- >      > >> From: Sylvain Coutant [mailto:sco@xxxxxxxxxx >     <mailto:sco@xxxxxxxxxx
>] >      > >> Sent: 16 May 2006 12:02 >      > >> To: Petersson, Mats; 'Julius Spencer'; >      > xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 <mailto:xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >      > >> Subject: RE: [Xen-users] Basic Xen Question >      > >> >      > >>>> Does anyone know if it is possible to patch an older kernel (eg.
 >      > >>>> 2.6.9) so it can be compiled to run as a Xen kernel (dom0)? >      > >>> Now, my question is: Why would you want that? >      > >> ie, just because one have some other patches to apply against the
 >      > >> kernel. It can sometimes be a true nightmare to set up a full >      > >> dom0+domU which includes every tool one need :-( >      > > >      > > Ok, fair enough. You'd just have to look at which patches are the
 >      > > biggest - and I think Xen is quite intrusive, so unless your other >      > > patches are also touching a lot of files in the kernel, I would >      > > suspect that porting the other patches would be easier...
 >      > > >      > > -- >      > > Mats >      > >> -- >      > >> Sylvain >      > >> >      > >> >      > >>
 >      > >> >      > > >      > > >      > > _______________________________________________ >      > > Xen-users mailing list >      > > 
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >     <mailto:Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >      > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
 >      > > >      > >      > > > >     _______________________________________________ >     Xen-users mailing list >     
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >     http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > 
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
  _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list 
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
    
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users 
 |   
 
 | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
    |