Tape Libraries and Drives
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Problem with scsi addresses and ADIC tape unit

Evelyn Daroga
Regular Advisor

Problem with scsi addresses and ADIC tape unit

I thought I posted this yesterday, but don't see it. So, if this is duplicated, I apologize.

I have an ADIC FastStor-2 tape unit configured on an N-Class HPUX-11.00 machine, working fine.
I am now trying to add (daisy-chained) a second identical tape unit, and having problems getting it to communicate properly. The problem appears to be tied to the SCSI addresses of the Drive and the Loader. Here's the scenario:

Unit 1 SCSI Addr for Drive: 4
Unit 1 SCSI Addr for Loader: 5

Unit 2 SCSI Addr for Drive: 2
Unit 2 SCSI Addr for Loader: 3

Among other things, I have swapped the SCSI addresses (i.e., changed 4,5 to 2,3; and changed 2,3 to 4,5) between the two units. Whichever unit has the 4,5 SCSI combination works fine. Whichever unit has the 2,3 combination doesnt. This rules out hardware, cables, etc.

When I did ioscan and insf after adding the new unit, it built the "BEST" device files, but not the "m", "mn", etc files. I have never seen that happen before. I manually put the "m" files out there (mknod /dev/rmt/5m c 205 0x002000), and built the picker file (mknod /dev/picker3 c 203 0x003000), following the same pattern as the 4,5 combination that works. I made sure protections/ownership were the same.

But when I do mc -q -p /dev/picker3 I get:
ERROR: 0x0 No Sense : 0x0 No additional sense information

When I do uma -ioctl /dev/picker3 I get inconsistent results. Sometimes it says it is not a scsi device. Sometimes it will connect, but then when I do stat it either reports "No additional sense information", or else it reports some of the slots with errors, but not always the same ones. Sometimes it skips reporting some slots.

It does all this for whichever unit has the 2,3 scsi combination. Whichever unit has the 4,5 combination works just fine.

When I do "inq" within uma, both report identical information (same firmware rev, etc).
Ioscan shows both as "claimed".

Anybody have any ideas what I'm missing?
Thanks in advance!