Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 08:28:56 +0100 (CET) From: Soren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk> To: scott@renfro.org (Scott Renfro) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, raj@cisco.com (Richard Johnson) Subject: Re: ata-disk ioctl and atactl patch Message-ID: <200102260728.IAA43029@freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <20010225194120.A64003@bonsai.home.renfro.org> from Scott Renfro at "Feb 25, 2001 07:41:20 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It seems Scott Renfro wrote:
> As I promised on -mobile earlier this week, I've cleaned up my patches
> to port the {Net,Open}BSD atactl utility, including a simplistic
> ata-disk ioctl. They apply cleanly against this afternoon's -stable
> (including Soren's latest commit bringing -stable up to date with
> -current). I've been running them for some time and they ''work great
> here''.
>
> Before announcing this in a broader context, I wanted to get a bit of
> feedback on the ioctl implementation. In particular, is it safe to
> just do an ata_command inside adioctl() without any further checking?
> (e.g., can this cause bad things to happen under heavy i/o load?)
No its not safe at all, you risk trashing an already running command...
Anyhow, I have an atacontrol thingy in the works for attach/detach,
raid control etc, etc, I'll try to merge this functionality into that
(the ioctl's will change etc, but the functionality is nice)...
-Søren
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102260728.IAA43029>