	[x] Posted via EE Mobile
	Search, ask, and monitor your questions on the go with EE Mobile. Visit Experts Exchange from your mobile device and never be out of touch again.

05/14/2009 at 07:43AM PDT, ID: 24408717

	[x] Attachment Details

[x]

The Solution Rating System

With so many solutions, how can you tell which solutions are most likely to help you and which ones are not? To provide you with a tool to use, we rate our solutions based on various elements that most accurately determine if a solution is a quality solution. To explain what factors affect the solution rating, here are the elements we take into consideration when formulating our solution rating.

The Grade of the Solution
The Zone Rank of the Expert Providing the Solution
The Number of Author and Expert Comments
The Number of Experts Contributing
The Feedback of the Community

Your Input Matters
Because of the way the system is set up, the most important variable in this equation is you. As a member of Experts Exchange, you are able to cast your vote on the quality of the solutions in regard to how complete, accurate, helpful and easy to understand each solution is. When you provide your feedback, each rating is adjusted accordingly. So, if you see a solution that has a poor rating that you think is a good solution, let us know by rating it. As you do, the rating will be adjusted and will become more accurate for other members of our site.

If you have any suggestions that you would like to make for our rating system, please ask a question in the Suggestions Zone of Community Support.

Thank you!

6.4

Why doesn't IBMtape appear in the device path for all of my LTO-4 tape devices?

Asked by cireg in Unix Setup, Backup & Restore Software, Drivers

Tags: IBMtape, TSM, Solaris, device path

I am having an issue when generating the device tree in Solaris 10. When the path is created with a small number of drives (in this case 2) IBMtape@... appears in the device path like this:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 78 May 13 20:06 0st -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1:st

However, when the device tree is created with 60 drives attached st@... shows up in the device path for 58 out of 60 LTO-4 tape drives.

In the two drive scenario, the media changer and one drive are on VTL port 0a while the second drive is on VLT port 0b. When I create the device paths IBMtape@ &.. shows up in the path.

When I perform the same steps with 30 drives assigned to each port st@ &.. is in the device path. At first glance you would think that the st driver has taken over those devices. Yet a long listing shows the major number is 305. The number 305 is assigned to the IBMtape driver in /etc/name_to_major. I just dont understand the inconsistency in the device path. Does it really matter as long as the driver is IBMtape (305)?

Here is what I currently see:

[root@v240 /]# grep IBMtape /etc/name_to_major

IBMtape 305

[root@v240 /]# ls -l /dev/rmt/*|grep st|wc -l

480 <-- this number equates to the 8 entries created for each of the 60 LTO-4 tape drives.

Here is an example path:

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/0st -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/st@w510a09820001922c,1:st

NOTICE the major number is 305 (see below)

# ls -l /devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/st@w510a098

crw------- 1 root sys 305, 1937 May 14 02:38 /devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/st@w510a09820001922c,1:st

All of the device paths look like this with the st@ except for two drives 29st & 59st:

[root@v240 /]# ls -l /dev/rmt/* |grep IBM

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29st -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:st

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 80 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stb -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stb

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 81 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stbn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stbn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 80 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stc -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stc

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 81 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stcb -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stcb

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 82 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stcbn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stcbn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 81 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stcn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stcn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 80 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/29stn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3,1/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09820001922c,1e:stn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59st -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:st

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 78 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stb -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stb

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stbn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stbn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 78 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stc -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stc

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stcb -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stcb

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 80 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stcbn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stcbn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stcn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stcn

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 78 May 14 02:32 /dev/rmt/59stn -> ../../devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stn

NOTICE the major number is 305 (see below):

#ls -l /devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a

crw------- 1 root sys 305, 3332 May 14 03:09 /devices/pci@1e,600000/SUNW,qlc@3/fp@0,0/IBMtape@w510a09800001922c,1d:stn

The st driver in /etc/name_to_major maps to 33.

I think everything is correct, but I dont understand why the device names are inconsistent.

View the Solution FREE for 30 Days

20091028-EE-VQP-87 - Hierarchy / EE_QW_3_20080625

1. gheist 44,596
2. omarfarid 34,598
3. blu 11,510
4. woolmilkp... 10,850
5. Tintin 8,470
6. oklit 8,300
7. fosiul01 6,900
8. yuzh 6,500
9. already_... 5,332
10. ahoffmann 4,750
11. turnbulld 4,100
12. ozo 4,085
13. dvz 4,000
13. mrjoltcola 4,000
15. nemws1 3,514
16. arnold 3,500
16. Rowley 3,500
16. noci 3,500
19. savone 3,400
20. netcmh 2,750
21. joules17 2,560
22. sppalser 2,400
23. mikelfritz 2,100
24. jools 2,080
25. svs 2,000
25. PeteLong 2,000
25. sunnycoder 2,000
25. torimar 2,000
25. rindi 2,000
25. Adam314 2,000
25. marcparillo 2,000
25. kosarajud... 2,000
25. eztiger79 2,000
25. edster9... 2,000
25. tankergoblin 2,000
25. bradhanson 2,000
25. tapanpatt... 2,000
25. TheKerrnel 2,000
25. segurah 2,000
25. Andytw 2,000
25. Muhamma... 2,000
25. docbert 2,000
25. flob9 2,000
25. RBEIMS 2,000

1. gheist 125,201
2. yuzh 120,379
3. omarfarid 73,796
4. ahoffmann 40,503
5. tfewster 39,796
6. Tintin 37,522
7. JustUNIX 32,706
8. sppalser 26,314
9. blu 26,260
10. jlevie 17,977
11. ozo 10,865
12. woolmilkp... 10,850
13. robocat 10,700
14. oklit 10,300
15. pxh 9,150
16. mikelfritz 8,600
17. n0thing 8,060
18. chris_cal... 7,622
19. arthurjb 7,080
20. Rowley 7,050
21. fosiul01 6,900
22. sunnycoder 6,875
23. jlms 6,620
24. bpeterse 6,496
25. sjm_ee 6,400

Why doesn't IBMtape appear in the device path for all of my LTO-4 tape devices?

Asked by cireg in Unix Setup, Backup & Restore Software, Drivers

Tags: IBMtape, TSM, Solaris, device path

About this solution