From owner-freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Thu Nov 5 20:07:37 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD6ADA275BC for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 20:07:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allan@physics.umn.edu) Received: from mail.physics.umn.edu (smtp.spa.umn.edu [128.101.220.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A45717A8 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 20:07:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allan@physics.umn.edu) Received: from spa-sysadm-01.spa.umn.edu ([134.84.199.8]) by mail.physics.umn.edu with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ZuQFc-0000AF-IF for freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 13:31:12 -0600 Message-ID: <563BAE81.6000409@physics.umn.edu> Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 13:31:13 -0600 From: Graham Allan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mps driver on 10.2-BETA References: <55DE5365.6090608@physics.umn.edu> <55DF1F78.2080204@physics.umn.edu> <55DF6F1F.9070909@physics.umn.edu> In-Reply-To: <55DF6F1F.9070909@physics.umn.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 20:07:37 -0000 On 8/27/2015 3:12 PM, Graham Allan wrote: > On 8/27/2015 9:32 AM, Graham Allan wrote: >> >> I have another system which isn't in production yet - I can do the same >> test on that and see if the newer 20.00.00.04 is stable. This is also >> running 9.3 but the test should still be valid. I will be using this >> system for 10.2 testing, but would like to keep it on 9.3 for a short >> time to try and resolve any issues with that. > > I updated the firmware on this HBA to 20.00.04.00 and ran some stress > tests - all looks fine after 4+ hours. I'm pretty certain that issues > showed up long before that with 20.00.00.00 (ideally I'd like to retest > that, but I don't have a stashed copy of that firmware). > > To reiterate, this is with FreeBSD 9.3, and in this particular case the > HBA is a 9205-8e. > > I expect I'll get to re-test within the next few weeks with FreeBSD > 10.2. But for now it seems like firmware 20.00.04.00 has the previous > problems fixed. I meant to reply to myself earlier - I now have been running 10.2 with the 20.00.04.00 firmware for a while now, and it does seem stable. Graham