From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 31 04:00:30 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E288A405 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 04:00:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from mail-vc0-f171.google.com (mail-vc0-f171.google.com [209.85.220.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52CD86D for ; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 04:00:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f171.google.com with SMTP id ha11so1502665vcb.2 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wemm.org; s=google; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=j3lEfUgl3ENIkRJe1asq24n4ZDTwwnC7JLLuXafk/pE=; b=CI+JNeVQ4WyrhFfGG539oN7s2qRlCq9fkBckNwKmZ4O1sSK84GeKWpvIXFnrr7i1ln +OYPeGVZaPjct55QdCJsKEkjsKMIFZ4GUVu7p2vuYC/ex6+buOCx+A+hdpdbjatrv1/b vhd24ZCieI3qvtn6FDYbX+72WTy+YdTplHqXY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=j3lEfUgl3ENIkRJe1asq24n4ZDTwwnC7JLLuXafk/pE=; b=NTlVEYsyqWVB/AHE0UkcPF/V/AddhPZnFyd0ANCM9JSk8PrQ+mroDHusyEDAW6pTaC J61NQcfrsiNt+rf5Bi+YvK0fQ/0d0iIXPXp3XHqmj2xoYgQWlcyVEjXH/At8egaJn4xB Ag+HYeFC2M+Fbgl/bupGFSLeeznT1ky0GQ38L69kF5bVuE+J0EmPnxApbrJnBVLAhif1 Wrjw37luKva1Yca5UqzzFd7FBl3h6AxQZZQSBeksyDbQYhGUeGeztP+Do4R8CdzR9j0Q iEA+EyLQ2L8RYLdSmELlGMmvsM31dwSjmcobKb1FUGG5yWhMkC+d1hecGipC6cqX+WJM bb4w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.35.110 with SMTP id g14mr4933384vdj.61.1364702424376; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.221.11.72 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5157756F.4040908@FreeBSD.org> References: <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org> <5157756F.4040908@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack? From: Peter Wemm To: Matthias Andree Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmu9vCGOAZ/Un44Oybg3bkr5plOxFEXfxYXc02wzrzbhG7CWxBMpLkyGRJkg5dcEKB19o/3 Cc: Alexander Motin , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 04:00:30 -0000 On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Matthias Andree 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