Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:40:30 -0400
joe briggs <jbriggs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have a client who has a raid controller currently supported under windows, and now wants to support linux as a bootable device. Currently, some of their trade secrets are contained in the driver as opposed to the controller firmware, etc., so for now they wish to release a binary-only driver to certain beta customers. (i.e., 1st stage of porting is similar functionality as windows). Am I correct that in order to boot off of this device that the driver would have to be statically linked in vs. a module which could be distributed as a binary-only driver keyed to the kernel.revision of the distribution's kernel? I would like to avoid any flames and ask that all recognize that some hardware providers are having to ease into the pond a toe at a time. Any constructive thoughts, suggestions, references, tips, etc. highly appreciated.
The driver could be a module and live in initramfs. If you can
get the initial Linux image and initramfs loaded, you would be okay.
Rather an initrd under Linux.
Note that there is a partial source driver, and RH driver's disks here: (look under raid IC with the right chipset for partial source.)
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/usaindex.htm
If you are doing raid 1. Lilo should work. It doesn't really matter if lilo isn't aware of of the data on the other drive. Each has a full copy of everything.
The problem is more in the bootloader (LILO or GRUB) would not no how
to do raid. The /boot partition would have to be on a non-raid partition.
Same problem if driver is statically linked in the kernel.
PS- Newer linux kernels should be able to support the "raid" controller as a normal ide controller. You could then just configure linux software raid.