From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 27 23:15:17 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D36D16A4CE for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:15:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C7543D1D for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:15:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j2RNFTb61544 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:15:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:15:16 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 In-Reply-To: <154613622.20050327112206@wanadoo.fr> Importance: Normal Subject: RE: Anthony's drive issues.Re: ssh password delay X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:15:17 -0000 owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org wrote: > Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > >> In a case like this it is very likely a BSD driver issue - why, >> because the FreeBSD driver author could not test with every >> custom-modified microcode when he wrote the driver. There is no list >> out there of every computer company who has had a source license to >> the Adaptec microcode and made modifications to it. And naturally you >> would assume that anyone making mods to the SCSI microcode would have >> the brains not to break it. In this case that didn't happen. Most >> likely HP modified the Adaptec microcode because of bugs in the disks >> that they were supplying with the original Vectras. > > I wouldn't automatically assume that there were _bugs_ in the disks. > Not for the Seagate that you have but as I've said before I've had problems with Quantum SCSI disk drives on other controllers, in different systems, and even on NT. And, HP used to manufacture their own SCSI disks, as I recall they stopped doing it sometime around that era. They put special firmware that supported some extra features in the HP 6000 and S800/900 (like sector atomicity, patent EP565855, anyone remember that) in them, and did that up until 1996. I also recall issues with the HP disks on certain controllers. I suspect that some of those Vectra servers were sold with HP disks in them. >> ... and b) Anthony is convinced that his Vectra has an Adaptec >> chipset and microcode that runs that chipset that is pefectly good >> and identically compliant to every other Adaptec chipset ... > > I don't recall ever saying anything about the microcode, only the > hardware. > OK, but let's just say that the way you were using the terminology you wern't differentiating the microcode from the aic7880 chipset. Granted, we on the list overlooked this as well - nobody asked you early on to post the firmware versions of the Adaptec controller. We all I think assumed that HP just used the Adaptec aic7880 with the regular Adaptec firmware/microcode. >> With that sort of attitude if he were to approach the author of the >> ahc() driver he would be told to stick his head up his ass. > > Whereas Microsoft just modified the OS to accommodate the special > microcode. That's why Microsoft is number one. You also pay Microsoft for their stuff - makes a big difference - my guess if you contacted the ahc() developer and offered to pay him the cost of an NT server license he would be more than happy to mod the driver no matter how much of an asshole you chose to be to him. (or her) In any case if you meet the driver author halfway and don't approach it like it's his driver that's broken, but rather that your hardware isn't exactly compliant, (regardless of what you really believe) you won't be put into the anal insertion category. Ted