Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 03:36:50 -0400 (EDT) From: jonathan@kc8onw.net To: "Jeremy Chadwick" <koitsu@freebsd.org> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATA APM and NCQ support in FreeBSD atacontrol Message-ID: <58131.80.91.220.50.1210577810.squirrel@www.kc8onw.net> In-Reply-To: <20080512072316.GA3845@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <29626.214.13.212.30.1210554531.squirrel@www.kc8onw.net> <Pine.BSF.3.96.1080512141540.3891B-100000@gaia.nimnet.asn.au> <53004.80.91.220.50.1210576570.squirrel@www.kc8onw.net> <20080512072316.GA3845@eos.sc1.parodius.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 12, 2008 03:23, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 03:16:10AM -0400, jonathan@kc8onw.net wrote: > >> On Mon, May 12, 2008 00:52, Ian Smith wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 11 May 2008 jonathan@kc8onw.net wrote: >>> >>>> I found this PR (with patch) to add APM and acoustic management >>>> control to atacontrol. The PR was opened in May 2005 has not been >>>> changed since December 2006 and is still open. >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=81692&cat= >>> >>> As for APM and AAM, that functionality is handled by >>> sysutils/ataidle, which that PR appears - on a quick glance - to >>> pretty well duplicate. >>> >>> I see phk@ recently added an 'atacontrol spindown' command to HEAD >>> and RELENG_7 that appears to offer similar functionality to 'ataidle >>> -S >>> standby_mins' or 'ataidle -I idle_mins', though specified in seconds >>> instead. However this doesn't address acoustic management. >>> >>> Or is ataidle broken for SATA disks? >>> >> >> I think the idea was to put the ability to control it where people see >> it first. I expected to be able to control NCQ, APM, and acoustic >> management from atacontrol considering it listed whether they were >> enabled or not. > > Well, atacontrol(8) does let you control many things, but most pertain > to ataraid(4). Otherwise, it acts purely as an ATA/SATA information > utility; maybe it should be renamed atainfo(8)? That would probably confuse more existing users than it would help new ones. I don't think it would be worth renaming it unless the raid functionality was moved to a separate command, which would be a pointless bunch of work. > The expectation that the tool should be able to control those things is > legitimate, but if this is something you absolutely *need*, then I would > recommend going with Linux instead. Their libata has support for all of > the above, and has userland applications to control said features. Nope, I'm happy with FreeBSD. This is more of a minor quirk than anything else for me. I figured I would see if anything had changed since the last mailing list messages I found where well over a year old. >> ataidle is easy enough to find, I won't deny, but why make users do the >> google search and install a port when there is (what looks to me) a >> fairly simple patch that can be added to the base system. Either way it >> would be good to get the PR closed one way or the other considering the >> backlog... > > There are a "decent" number of PRs pertaining to ATA/SATA stuff in > FreeBSD, some going back over 2 years which fix very severe bugs in RAID > (see my Common Issues list for examples). Where is this list? I did a quick search but couldn't find it. > Your cries are heard by some, but I'm left believing Soren is just super > busy with real life. I consider this even more justification that the ATA > layer in FreeBSD needs additional eyes familiar with it, and not just a > single person. No argument here. Soren does an incredible job maintaining ATA as it is and I am very grateful that he has put as much of his time into the project as he has. (Thanks Soren!) Jonathan Stewart
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?58131.80.91.220.50.1210577810.squirrel>