Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:13:37 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Gavin Atkinson <gavin@FreeBSD.org> Cc: mav@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>, freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Switchover to CAM ATA? Message-ID: <31A502A0-DB53-4677-BF92-6DD826ED449C@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <1272367989.97887.47.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> References: <4BD06BD9.6030401@FreeBSD.org> <20100426.103327.319083499807534535.imp@bsdimp.com> <1272367989.97887.47.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 27, 2010, at 5:33 AM, Gavin Atkinson wrote: > On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 10:33 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: >> My opinion for the path forward: >> (1) Send a big heads up about the future of ataraid(5). It will be >> shot in the head soon, to be replaced be a bunch of geom classes >> for each different container format. At least that seems to be >> the rough consensus I've seen so far. We need worker bees to do >> many of these classes, although much can be mined from the ataraid >> code today. >=20 > Losing ataraid would be bad. I suspect there are a lot of installs > using it - especially as there is no way to create any other mirror = from > sysinstall. However, I'm not actually sure that the functionality it > provides is easy to push down into GEOM. >=20 > ataraid depends on knowing a lot about the underlying hardware, in = order > to know which format of metadata to use. i.e. it needs to know that = the > disks are attached to (say) a Highpoint controller. This is unfortunately true, especially on older controllers. I think = that there are reasonable ways to address this though, by having CAM SIMs provide a bit more information in their PATH_INQ response. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?31A502A0-DB53-4677-BF92-6DD826ED449C>