Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:56:16 -0600
From:      Barry Pederson <bp@barryp.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: HEADS UP: Major CAM performance regression
Message-ID:  <49AD6130.8040703@barryp.org>
In-Reply-To: <200902172307.n1HN74ml025580@pyroxene.sentex.ca>
References:  <499551B9.7050805@samsco.org> <200902172307.n1HN74ml025580@pyroxene.sentex.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Tancsa wrote:
> At 05:55 AM 2/13/2009, Scott Long wrote:
> 
>> If, instead, it reports a value of '1', you are likely affected.  Note
>> that it may be normal for USB memory devices to report a low number.
>> Also, many legacy SCSI disks, and devices that are not disks, may also 
>> be expected to report a low number.
> 
> Hi Scott,
>         I tested with the patch on my areca controller, and it still 
> reports 1 post patch.  (On RELENG_6, it shows 255 with the same controller)

I can report a "metoo" on a 7.0-RELEASE-p3 machine with an Areca 
ARC-1212 card and SATA drives.  "camcontrol tags da0" reports:

	(pass0:arcmsr0:0:0:0): device openings: 1

The machine is just a dog sometimes.  Haven't tried the patch though.

	Barry




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49AD6130.8040703>