PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] Tape Drive not being detected properly


tomwerner470
January 25th, 2009, 06:04 PM
Hi,

I am having some issues getting a tape drive working properly. The drive was working perfectly when the system was running Ubuntu 6.06 (Drake?). I have done alot of trawling of various tips, most won't work. I hope someone outthere can help....

So far I have identified:

cat /var/log/messages | grep -i "scsi" (extract)

Jan 25 21:00:46 server4 kernel: [ 1232.529284] scsi 2:0:1:0: Sequential-Access Seagate STT3401A 310C PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
Jan 25 21:00:46 server4 kernel: [ 1232.561682] target2:0:1: FAST-40 SCSI 40.0 MB/s ST (25 ns, offset 127)


sg_map


/dev/sg0 /dev/sda
/dev/sg1 <--- Being blank I guess it isn't being assigned properly
/dev/sg2 /dev/sdb


Although the scsi driver appears to be picking it up in the probe, it is not getting assigned an entry in /dev.

I have read various tips talking about rmmod/modprobe ide-scsi, ide-tape and st but none of these modules were found - are they obselete or are they available in packages? I have installed the mt-st package from the repos.

I am using Hardy 8.04.2.

Any help would be appreciated,

Cheers,

Tom

redroad55
January 25th, 2009, 10:27 PM
Hi, Is the drive recognized in Bios ?
Are you using an scsi controller card or is it a chip built in the motherboard ?
Are there any firmware updates appropriate for this Tape Drive
Let's start there 1st

aaron.d
January 26th, 2009, 09:49 AM
is there anything else on the controller, and if so, is it working? It is obviously recognized in the BIOS if the kernel can ID it, and that seems like a hella old tape drive, so firmware is what it is, most likely.
Wondering if you have the right modules.

show us the whole she-bang:

cat /proc/scsi/scsi

and

sudo /sbin/lsmod

tomwerner470
January 26th, 2009, 11:56 AM
Hey Guys,

Here is the info requested:

cat /proc/scsi/scsi

Attached devices:
Host: scsi2 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00
Vendor: VMware, Model: VMware Virtual S Rev: 1.0
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Host: scsi2 Channel: 00 Id: 01 Lun: 00
Vendor: Seagate Model: STT3401A Rev: 310C
Type: Sequential-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Host: scsi2 Channel: 00 Id: 02 Lun: 00
Vendor: VMware, Model: VMware Virtual S Rev: 1.0
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02


sudo /sbin/lsmod
Module Size Used by
sg 36752 0
vmblock 16544 3
vsock 40344 0
vmmemctl 10556 0
vmhgfs 44288 0
parport_pc 28324 0
parport 38472 1 parport_pc
ipv6 266372 14
evdev 13056 0
psmouse 19592 0
serio_raw 7940 0
pcspkr 4224 0
container 5632 0
i2c_piix4 9612 0
button 9232 0
intel_agp 25492 1
agpgart 34760 1 intel_agp
ac 6916 0
i2c_core 24832 1 i2c_piix4
vmci 32552 1 vsock
ext3 135816 2
jbd 46740 1 ext3
mbcache 9600 1 ext3
sd_mod 30592 5
floppy 59460 0
pcnet32 34820 0
mii 6400 1 pcnet32
mptspi 19720 3
mptscsih 27904 1 mptspi
mptbase 60644 2 mptspi,mptscsih
scsi_transport_spi 25472 1 mptspi
ata_piix 19588 0
ata_generic 8324 0
pata_acpi 8320 0
libata 159216 3 ata_piix,ata_generic,pata_acpi
scsi_mod 150924 6 sg,sd_mod,mptspi,mptscsih,scsi_transport_spi,libat a
thermal 16668 0
processor 36488 1 thermal
fan 5636 0
fbcon 42784 0
tileblit 3456 1 fbcon
font 9472 1 fbcon
bitblit 6784 1 fbcon
softcursor 3072 1 bitblit
vmxnet 19200 0


Just a bit more about the setup, this is a Virtual Machine running under VMware using scsi passthrough, however, unless there is a convincing reason, I don't think this is the issue, my Ubuntu 6 VM with the same setup worked without an issue. Also this is an ide tape drive, but again, this drive worked perfectly through the ide-scsi module before...

The only thing I could think of is the drive was removed from the supported list because of it's age?

Cheers for the interest so far, hopefully someone can shed some light...

Regards

Tom

aaron.d
January 26th, 2009, 01:13 PM
I have never worked on anything in this type of setup, but I think you are missing the tape driver module (st). Try finding and loading that.

tomwerner470
January 26th, 2009, 02:00 PM
Any ideas where I can get the st module from?

/lib/modules/2.6.24-23-virtual/kernel/drivers/scsi does not contain st.ko.

Google searches are finding nothing to say what package this is in or whether it has been superceeded.

tomwerner470
January 26th, 2009, 02:36 PM
After some investigation, it appears to be an issue with the -virtual kernel package that is installed as default by vm-builder. As part of the 'optimisation' process drivers are taken out, one of which is the tape module.

I did try a straight copy from a -server module directory (sane kernel version) but to be honest I didnt have any luck loading it, I tried:

sudo depmod st (there was a few seconds pause, no output)
sudo modprobe st (error message)

Anyway for now, I have got it working by booting a -server kernel instead of the virtual, hopefully that won't have too much of an impact...

However, any ideas how I could make the copy? Or should I raise a bug as although rare, i doubt this is unheard off?

Cheers for the help,

Tom

aaron.d
January 27th, 2009, 08:48 AM
Glad it works. As for the module, it should be available in one of the modules packages available for the kernel, or the source at the very least. The one you grabbed most likely failed for a number of reasons (they have to be compiled with the same gcc version, etc).

I don't know if I would consider it a bug, per se, to not have a specific module included, but I don't really think it is "optimized" when the module isn't loaded, it doesn't affect the kernel at all. Maybe they are trying to save space??

If the server kernel works, I would say rock that, I have never used "VM" specific kernels though, so I can't say what you might be missing.

tomwerner470
January 27th, 2009, 12:36 PM
Yeah, I don't know the exact details of the kernel tuning that takes place for the virtual packages, although I am sure they have played with the HZ setting to try and avoid issues of a guest ticking faster than a host...

Apart from that, they stripped alot of the unneeded drivers as mentioned above.

Anyways, thanks for the help with this...

Tom

redroad55
January 29th, 2009, 11:09 AM
I'm wondering on this if the driver is being removed as part of the optimization process then it perceives it as not being needed .. Am I right in thinking that?