From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 4 16:49:52 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ED121065680 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:49:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matheus@eternamente.info) Received: from phoenix.eternamente.info (phoenix.eternamente.info [109.169.62.232]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F188FC08 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:49:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by phoenix.eternamente.info (Postfix, from userid 80) id CA4C91CC6C; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:49:48 -0300 (BRT) Received: from 187.64.96.140 (SquirrelMail authenticated user matheus) by eternamente.info with HTTP; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:49:48 -0200 Message-ID: <9b7059121aa0602802bab30619f04e02.squirrel@eternamente.info> In-Reply-To: <4EDB92CC.5020800@FreeBSD.org> References: <4EDB92CC.5020800@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:49:48 -0200 From: "Nenhum_de_Nos" To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Subject: Re: Sil3124 + Sil4726 PortMultipier and FreeBSD9 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:49:52 -0000 On Sun, December 4, 2011 13:33, Alexander Motin wrote: > On 04.12.2011 04:46, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote: >> this port multiplier will work ok ? On Sil3124 and which others ? >> >> the tip on FreeNAS was great, but my main concern here is the sata hardware compatibility. I'd >> like to buy it knowing it will work :) > > Port multipliers supported by all siis(4) hardware and many mvs(4) and > ahci(4). In case of mvs(4) and ahci(4) support and effectiveness depends > on controller model. SiI3124 is known to be a good option. If > performance is not the first priority (150MB/s should be enough for home > NAS) -- SiI3132 and SiI3531 are also fine. 6Gbps Marvell 88SE91xx in > _non-RAID_ versions also good on tests, but there are not so many > reports about them yet. thanks for the info. I plan on not using hardware raid. will be Geom_(mirror/stripe) - as is now - or ZFS. I have sil3124 on PCI so far, and an older version that is being used on current file server: atapci1@pci0:0:9:0: class=0x010400 card=0x61141095 chip=0x31141095 rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Silicon Image Inc (Was: CMD Technology Inc)' device = 'SATALink/SATARaid Controller (Sil 3114)' class = mass storage subclass = RAID two years, always on and no issues so far. > I can't say for sure about ICH7 and NM10, but many Intel chipset > controllers support port multipliers when AHCI is enabled. I have > feeling that all of them support it in hardware (at least since ICH8), > but it is blocked by BIOS. At least I had motherboard that had and lost > port multipliers support after some BIOS update. You may see that info > in ahci(4) boot messages. Unluckily now Intel supports only > command-based switching, that allows only one device beyond port > multiplier execute commands at a time and significantly limits > performance. Controller support for more effective FIS-based switching > reported by ahci(4) and mvs(4) drivers during boot. All siis(4) > controllers support FIS-based switching. great info, I found some PCI-X and PCIe based sil3124 card that report FIS-compatible, but I can't find on my PCI version. By your saying, I get great news then :) I'll buy FIS-enabled PM :) I Plan on buying if needed a PCIe version of it, and if I find port multiplier for SATA 6Gbs, I will plan on one also. > Also note that not all controller BIOSes support detecting and booting > from devices on port multiplier, except one on the first port. Consider > that when choosing controller and partitioning disks if you are going to > boot from them. thanks again, but I plan on booting from onboard controller. The PM is intended on expanding capacity, and as is home file server, speed won't be a huge issue. If I can stream a high definition video twice, its ok. > Port multipliers themselves are quite simple from driver point of view, > so all of them should be supported if they follow standards. At least I > haven't seen reports yet that some one is not supported. What's about > reliability comparison -- I have no info. ok, I will do some testing when I receive it and plan to tell here results. thanks for all, matheus > -- > Alexander Motin > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Vítima da Oi entre 2007 e 2011. We will call you cygnus, The God of balance you shall be A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style