From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 9 09:52:22 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40F49497 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 09:52:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com [209.85.212.170]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C30DD8FC14 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 09:52:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id hq7so514191wib.1 for ; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 01:52:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=RSev5BNZsaVybnL0Uq4G3T/oj8b0GCKqvVO0NRqfVdw=; b=X+k5gvUtH+fZu6jfLxqmntWyhzzHf8ZfwxDmugpd/xxgnNWhUANiMG7RHpNQGCz5BS 4HCIsy8c5HOmzdSBg7tCu0+Zz1vI8+OlbrOjcACMM2de+zoa1Z0P8Xl0LrG2+MWIri1A HOQRjFfwho8Mug8KWJppzUpUPcxYKYWsC2P4uImRPSZ2doijS7V5xCNFdMArMyWgGF+M GqanAUuCsjqPn+TaeqY7wyF23kyxHazOqarf1/FfiHBu4f5YkPmMjRQ6ovzJlJdBff+C pnmwqe7ojAU+7ovPPZicmlHxqWHJyyWjy3VLrwaUHrk69bbfS6hTQ3/JUGobKfaguaej hu0g== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.102.234 with SMTP id fr10mr5807868wib.17.1355046740782; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 01:52:20 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.217.57.9 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 01:52:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20121209091305.238100@gmx.com> References: <20121209091305.238100@gmx.com> Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 01:52:20 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VqG-SDziBHCMl4OLEE__5iPcm0w Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD for serious performance? From: Adrian Chadd To: Dieter BSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 09:52:22 -0000 Right, so the bug here is "why isn't atacam attaching to the nforce4 ultra chipset." So this has changed from "FreeBSD doesn't do NCQ" to "FreeBSD doesn't do NCQ on my particular desktop-aimed motherboard chipset." They're slightly different in scope, wouldn't you agree? Please file a PR and see if that can get resolved. I personally have no idea about the storage side of things so I don't know if it's a device id or whether there's something more complicated than that. Thanks, Adrian