Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:28:05 -0500 (EST) From: John Von Essen <essenz@beck.quonix.net> To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adaptec's raidutil (asr-utils), 2010S and 5.2 Message-ID: <20040127162232.P64803@beck.quonix.net> In-Reply-To: <20040127144842.H6614@pooker.samsco.home> References: <53616.68.3.131.72.1075232906.squirrel@mail.asn.net> <20040127152341.V64702@beck.quonix.net> <20040127144842.H6614@pooker.samsco.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks Scott, thats sort of the answer I was hoping for. Correct me if I am wrong but the aac driver covers all U320 RAID cards that are 1-channel or higher (i.e, not including the zero channel stuff), right? -john On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Scott Long wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, John Von Essen wrote: > > Since most poeple use FreeBSD as a server platform, and most servers use > > RAID, and most RAID is done with the Apadtec cards.... > > > > Is there a reason why there is no interest in fixing these > > supposedly "wrong" things? Or is the intention to focus solely on the aac > > driver and support the newer U320 raid cards under the aac driver - > > which does things "correctly"? > > Apparently it hasn't been enough of an itch for people to scratch. I did > all of the AAC work for two reasons: 1) I think that the AAC architecure > and products are superior to ASR in practically every respect (as is > witnessed by market pressures forcing Adaptec to abandon ASR and stick > with AAC), 2) Adaptec believed that FreeBSD support for AAC was important > enough that I was able to justify working on it as part of my normal job. > > I have no justification to work on ASR during paid hours, and it doesn't > interest me enough to work on it in my free time. I and others here in > my office feel somewhat guilty that the ASR code has languished so much, > but it really is beyond our means to do more with it. If it was > just a matter of fixing a few bugs, it would be a different > matter. Unfortunately, making the ASR driver and tools work well > requires more than just a few hours of random work. However, all of the > source is available for someone to pick up and run with. > > Scott > > > > > > > > -john > > > > On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Scott Long wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Kris Gale wrote: > > > > If this question is better asked on a different list, just let me know. > > > > > > > > I'm using an Adaptec 2010S (0-Channel RAID) with raidutil (part of > > > > ports/sysutils/asr-utils). On all of my 4.x machines, it works just fine. > > > > However, I've recently purchased a couple of new servers (all the same > > > > hardware), and decided to give 5.2 a try. (Actually, I'm running -CURRENT > > > > as of 1/23/04) > > > > > > > > In order to get it to run, I had to create a symlink in /dev/ from rasr0 > > > > to dptr17. After doing this, it appears to run properly, but is unable to > > > > get any data off of the Adaptec card. > > > > > > > > Did something change in FreeBSD 5 that would have broken this tool? It > > > > > > The asr driver and asr userland tools do a lot of horribly wrong > > > things that were never meant to work, let alone guaranteed to work. > > > The driver used to do a lot of digging around in kernel internals (and > > > ignoring the proper APIs to do the corret things) that might not work > > > any more. The userland aps have special knowledge of how the driver > > > does it's digging, and those assumptions might not be true anymore also. > > > The 'symlink trick' that youy describe is a good example of having to deal > > > with one of these problems. > > > > > > In any case, the source code to the asr command line tool and > > > communications back-end (called the 'Engine') is available from Adaptec's > > > website. It is certainly possible to fix these and the asr driver to work > > > properly, but it is a significant task that isn't terribly rewarding. I > > > know some people (myself included) that might be willing to do it under > > > contract. > > > > > > > seems like others are making this tool work under 5.1, based on the advice > > > > I found old mailing list posts that suggested making that symlink in > > > > /dev/. Maybe this problem is specific to the 2010S. > > > > > > > > > > The particular model of hardware has little to do with the problems > > > inherent in the software. > > > > > > Scott > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org mailing list > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-scsi-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-scsi-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040127162232.P64803>