Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: Matthias Andree <mandree@freebsd.org> Cc: Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack? Message-ID: <CAGE5yCqmVzCtG0AdNQpXqwPrFK%2BFjZEoeFWXwkWp=pjxQyNJ6Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5157756F.4040908@FreeBSD.org> References: <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org> <5157756F.4040908@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Matthias Andree <mandree@freebsd.org> wrote: > Am 27.03.2013 22:22, schrieb Alexander Motin: >> Hi. >> >> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA >> stack, using only some controller drivers of old ata(4) by having >> `options ATA_CAM` enabled in all kernels by default. I have a wish to >> drop non-ATA_CAM ata(4) code, unused since that time from the head >> branch to allow further ATA code cleanup. >> >> Does any one here still uses legacy ATA stack (kernel explicitly built >> without `options ATA_CAM`) for some reason, for example as workaround >> for some regression? Does anybody have good ideas why we should not drop >> it now? > > Alexander, > > The regression in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/157397 > where the SATA NCQ slots stall for some Samsung drives in the new stack, > and consequently hang the computer for prolonged episodes where it is in > the NCQ error handling, disallows removal of the old driver. (Last > checked with 9.1-RELEASE at current patchlevel.) We're talking about 10.x, so if you want it fixed, you need update with 10.x information. Please put 10.x diagnostics in the PR. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV bitcoin:188ZjyYLFJiEheQZw4UtU27e2FMLmuRBUE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGE5yCqmVzCtG0AdNQpXqwPrFK%2BFjZEoeFWXwkWp=pjxQyNJ6Q>