From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264110AbTDOVjc (for ); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:39:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264112AbTDOVjc (for ); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:39:32 -0400 Received: from air-2.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:1447 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264110AbTDOVjb (for ); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:39:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:50:05 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: Alan Cox Cc: 76306.1226@compuserve.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Problem: 2.4.20, 2.5.66 have different IDE channel order Message-Id: <20030415145005.20383a70.rddunlap@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1050439381.28591.15.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> References: <200304151436_MC3-1-3487-2162@compuserve.com> <1050439381.28591.15.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Organization: OSDL X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 15 Apr 2003 21:43:02 +0100 Alan Cox wrote: | On Maw, 2003-04-15 at 19:33, Chuck Ebbert wrote: | > Well, that matches what 2.4 does: | > | > | > 00:0d.1 IDE interface: Intel Corp. 82371SB PIIX3 IDE [Natoma/Triton II] | > 00:10.0 Unknown mass storage controller: Promise Technology, Inc. 20268 (rev 02) | > 01:0b.0 Unknown mass storage controller: Triones Technologies, Inc. HPT366 / HPT370 (rev 03) | > | > | > 2.5 nonmodular seems to be doing it in BIOS order -- the HPT370 BIOS | > initializes before the Promise (and won't let it boot but I can deal | > with that.) I'll probably replace it with a PDC20262 before looking | | Im a bit puzzled by this because it does look like a bug. Our pci scan code hasnt changed | that materially. I assume the promise and hpt are both plug in cards > but something also changed NIC interface ordering (according to davej et al)... so maybe it's deep inside PCI bus scanning. -- ~Randy