Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 11:57:09 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= <sos@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: kib@FreeBSD.ORG, "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Request for testing: ata(4) MFC Message-ID: <A6F33AAB-E9B1-406A-A9CA-119B1B2A45DA@FreeBSD.ORG> In-Reply-To: <20081010115855.GA31707@icarus.home.lan> References: <676151223134689@webmail38.yandex.ru> <20081005004808.GA70137@icarus.home.lan> <48E99C18.6070602@yandex.ru> <20081006051211.GA10542@icarus.home.lan> <20081010115855.GA31707@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10Oct, 2008, at 13:58 , Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 10:12:11PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 09:03:20AM +0400, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: >>> Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >>>> Also, does your patch include any fixes (intentional or =20 >>>> inadvertent) for >>>> Intel MatrixRAID? This has been a sore spot for FreeBSD for quite >>>> some time, and I'm curious to know if that has been fixed. >>> >>> There is only one fix for Intel Matrix RAID: >>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3Dkern/121899 >> >> Ahh, yeah, I've seen that one as well. I'll apply the patch and =20 >> let you >> know if the behaviour documented in the PR happens. > > I'm sorry I haven't gotten around to testing this -- my day (night) =20= > job > has kept me incredibly busy, and I've had hardly any time at home to > work on personal projects. It sucks. > > I'll try to make time for testing either today or tomorrow. I'm not sure how far this has gone into 7 yet, but it would be a "real =20= cool thing"(tm) to have the latest ATA module work back into 7.1 as =20 well. Its a no brainer actually with no functional changes other than =20= the possibility to load chipset specific code as modules. I know that a few HW vendors out there would *LOVE* this so they could =20= make modules for their HW to support FreeBSD on new fancy HW, mind you =20= that might be binary modules but still better than no support at all. =20= That would also offload the work on yours truely to concentrate on new =20= functionality etc instead of hunting new HW support all the time. -S=F8ren
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A6F33AAB-E9B1-406A-A9CA-119B1B2A45DA>