From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 29 13:05:15 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F8BA59 for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 13:05:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@grabthar.secnetix.de) Received: from grabthar.secnetix.de (grabthar.secnetix.de [212.17.241.225]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B0FB5A for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 13:05:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from grabthar.secnetix.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grabthar.secnetix.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4TD5DKK037955; Wed, 29 May 2013 15:05:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by grabthar.secnetix.de (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id r4TD5DAP037954; Wed, 29 May 2013 15:05:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 15:05:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <201305291305.r4TD5DAP037954@grabthar.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 9.1-stable: ATI IXP600 AHCI: CAM timeout In-Reply-To: <201305290809.r4T89EvT024069@grabthar.secnetix.de> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-stable User-Agent: tin/2.0.1-20111224 ("Achenvoir") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/9.1-PRERELEASE-20120811 (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: Wed, 29 May 2013 13:05:15 -0000 Now I have some more information ... The problem disappears when I disable NCQ, i.e. set the number of tags to 1 with camcontrol. Using binary search I found out that the problem also disappears with 2 tags, but with 3 tags I get the same amout of errors as with the default of 32 tags. Interestingly, the problems also disappears when I reduce the SATA level from II to I (i.e. from 3 to 1.5 Gbit/s), even if the NCQ tags are left at the default of 32. Now the question is: Is it better to reduce the NCQ tags from 32 to 2, or to reduce the SATA bandwidth from 3 Gbps to 1.5 Gbps? What is more likely to impact performance on a mixed server with shell users, apache, sendmail, DNS and a few other things? Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsreg.: Amtsgericht München, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen/-Produkte + mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd In my experience the term "transparent proxy" is an oxymoron (like jumbo shrimp). "Transparent" proxies seem to vary from the distortions of a funhouse mirror to barely translucent. I really, really dislike them when trying to figure out the corrective lenses needed with each of them. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer