Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:04:09 +0200 From: Victor Balada Diaz <victor@bsdes.net> To: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack? Message-ID: <20130331130409.GO3178@equilibrium.bsdes.net> In-Reply-To: <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org> References: <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote: > Hi. > > Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA > stack, using only some controller drivers of old ata(4) by having > `options ATA_CAM` enabled in all kernels by default. I have a wish to > drop non-ATA_CAM ata(4) code, unused since that time from the head > branch to allow further ATA code cleanup. > > Does any one here still uses legacy ATA stack (kernel explicitly built > without `options ATA_CAM`) for some reason, for example as workaround > for some regression? Does anybody have good ideas why we should not drop > it now? Hello, At my previous job we had troubles with NCQ on some controllers. It caused failures and silent data corruption. As old ata code didn't use NCQ we just used it. I reported some of the problems on 8.2[1] but the problem existed with 8.3. I no longer have access to those systems, so i don't know if the problem still exists or have been fixed on newer versions. Regards. Victor. [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/muc.lists.freebsd.stable/dAMf028CtXM -- La prueba más fehaciente de que existe vida inteligente en otros planetas, es que no han intentado contactar con nosotros.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130331130409.GO3178>