From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Mar 31 13:12:13 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E25AA0C;
 Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:12:13 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from victor@bsdes.net)
Received: from equilibrium.bsdes.net
 (244.Red-217-126-240.staticIP.rima-tde.net [217.126.240.244])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DD5ACB2;
 Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:12:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by equilibrium.bsdes.net (Postfix, from userid 1001)
 id CE7472283F; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:04:09 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:04:09 +0200
From: Victor Balada Diaz <victor@bsdes.net>
To: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack?
Message-ID: <20130331130409.GO3178@equilibrium.bsdes.net>
References: <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:12:13 -0000

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.