From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262362AbTJAPZU (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:25:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262369AbTJAPYk (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:24:40 -0400 Received: from smtp14.eresmas.com ([62.81.235.114]:18597 "EHLO smtp14.eresmas.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262362AbTJAPYG (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:24:06 -0400 Message-ID: <3F7AF183.5050900@wanadoo.es> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 17:23:47 +0200 From: Xose Vazquez Perez User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021003 X-Accept-Language: gl, es, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcelo Tosatti CC: syn uw , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com.br, atulm@lsil.com, linux-megaraid-devel@dell.com Subject: Re: Megaraid does not work with 2.4.22 References: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.63.3.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime 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 Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > Having two drivers for the same controller is not a good thing from a user this doesn't is first time: e100/eepro100 aic7xxx/aic7xxx_old sym53c8xx_2/sym53c8xx+ncr53c8xx ... > point of view. I just asked Atul privately but will do so again here: Why > do we need "megaraid2" ? megaraid 1.xx gets *very bad* performance. But like 2.4 is stable serie, it shouldn't be deleted. megaraid 2.xx gets correct performance, it's stable and it adds support for _present_ hardware, MegaRAID Ultra320 RAID boards(518, 520, 531, 532). -thanks- -- :x