From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 25 13:28:20 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4251816A4B3; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spider.deepcore.dk (cpe.atm2-0-53484.0x50a6c9a6.abnxx9.customer.tele.dk [80.166.201.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0845F43F93; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:28:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sos@spider.deepcore.dk) Received: from spider.deepcore.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spider.deepcore.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9PKSJfX037372; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 22:28:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sos@spider.deepcore.dk) Received: (from sos@localhost) by spider.deepcore.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9PKSIji037371; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 22:28:18 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sos) From: Soren Schmidt Message-Id: <200310252028.h9PKSIji037371@spider.deepcore.dk> In-Reply-To: <200310252018.h9PKIAvK037133@spider.deepcore.dk> To: Soren Schmidt Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 22:28:18 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99f (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-mail-scanned: by DeepCore Virus & Spam killer v1.3 cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG cc: Murray Stokely cc: sos@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Possible mouse/ATA problems in -STABLE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 20:28:20 -0000 It seems Soren Schmidt wrote: > > > ... > > > "This pushed the time spent between starting the ATA command and > > > starting the DMA engine over the hill for some controllers > > > (especially the Silicon Image DS3112a) and caused what looked > > > like lost interrupts." > > > > > > - so possibly we need another MFC... ? > > > > I think maybe we do. Unfortunately Soeren is not working on ATA in > > -stable. Is there anyone else (a committer?) who can verify that this > > analysis is correct? Can we circulate a patch? > > That change in -current doesn't not easily apply to -stable, and does > not change the amount of time spent in interrupt at all. The change > in current fixes total lockups of some controllers when the time > busdma use to setup the SG list is too long. Oh, maybe I should say that the ATA driver in -current is *very* different from the one in stable. This makes the idea of MFC's moot since very little code can be moved without a rewrite. This mandates significant testing etc since is will be like new virgin code. -Søren