Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I'm trying to set up a RAID0 array on an ABIT IC7-G with two SATA WD drives. My goal is to dualboot Slackware 10.1 and XP.
Right now, the array is installed through my motherboard's integrated controller (Silicon Image SiI 3112a). I'm trying to install Linux first.
I boot into slackware install, and I load the sata.i image. When I try to fdisk, it recognizes the two separate drives (/dev/sda, /dev/sdb) but also the array array itself (/dev/sda1). I'm not really sure why the array is a partition of the first drive or why the system recognizes the two drives separately when I just want the array.
Can I just go ahead and do the partitioning etc on sda1 and ignore the other two drives?
I should probably mention that I need to use the motherboard because I don't want to spend money on an expensive hardware RAID controller since the performance boost from hardware RAID is negligible. I also don't think matters of convenience would justify such an investment.
EDIT: Apparently I suck at math. the capacity listed for sda1 is correct.
Per the LQ Rules, please do not bump your own thread until at least 24 hours have elapsed without a reply. Because the LQ membership is global, people in other time zones may not have seen this post yet, and thus it may take some time before a response is received.
You probably need to tell the kernel not to probe the drives. Normally the kernel puts the drives attached to your serial ata controller at /dev/hde thru /dev/hdl. So when they are part of a raid you tell the kernel not to probe them at the lilo boot prompt like this:
boot: sata.i hde=noprobe hdf=noprobe ..... hdk=noprobe [enter]
Now it looks like your sata drives are detected as scsi drives, which is different. Do you ever load the RAID module for that controller or is it already in the kernel? I don't think 2.6 has any SATA RAID modules but I don't know for sure.
Either way, people always say install win($@#%%^a)dows first.
Originally posted by knobby You probably need to tell the kernel not to probe the drives. Normally the kernel puts the drives attached to your serial ata controller at /dev/hde thru /dev/hdl. So when they are part of a raid you tell the kernel not to probe them at the lilo boot prompt like this:
boot: sata.i hde=noprobe hdf=noprobe ..... hdk=noprobe [enter]
Now it looks like your sata drives are detected as scsi drives, which is different. Do you ever load the RAID module for that controller or is it already in the kernel? I don't think 2.6 has any SATA RAID modules but I don't know for sure.
Either way, people always say install win($@#%%^a)dows first.
At least from what I've read, support for the SiI3112 has been integrated since 2.4.26 in "medley." Slack 10.1's images are 2.4.29, so I presume that medley gets loaded no matter what image you choose.
I'm confused about this whole business with the way that the sata drives are being detected. I still don't get why 1) /dev/sda1, the array, is like a partition of /dev/sda, 2) why it's being identified as scsi in the first place, and 3) why slack recognizes both of my drives individually AND as an array. I actually haven't tried seeing what's in hde to hdl, but I'll look.
This kind of raises another question. Does it really matter if both disks are shown individually? Can I just ignore that and partition the array?
Richard, load WinXP and run Partition Magic, use the TASKS menu and run the (I would like to install another operating system) wizard. It will create the ext2 partition as well as a swap if you so desire. After doing so, reboot to the Slackware CD, load the sata.i configuration, then just run setup, it will autodetect the available partition and you'll be on your way, remember to mark your windows xp partition as active after you're done allocatting and resizing your partitions or you can get stuck if slackware has another error. If your NTFS partition is marked as active you'll be able to get back into xp if the slackware install fails, remember to always have a partition magic emergency bootdisk handy before you do any of this, so you can reverse any changes that adversely affect your startup. GRUB is great for multiple OSes and takes less reconfiguration than lilo, but you can also opt to use bootmagic off of partition magic, though I'm told its a little buggy. Hope that helps.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.