From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 3 20:31:11 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96801065696; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 20:31:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FE58FC1E; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 20:31:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.104.92.121] (166-205-132-119.mobile.mymmode.com [166.205.132.119] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n83KUonE090209; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:31:00 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) References: <200909031237.n83CbIgk032551@svn.freebsd.org> <20090903114121.C20031@pooker.samsco.org> <9bbcef730909031245o7c380925sd29b2cc976c4d7dd@mail.gmail.com> <200909031602.01222.jhb@freebsd.org> Message-Id: From: Scott Long To: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: <200909031602.01222.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (7A400) Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7A400) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:28:46 -0600 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.8 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , Alexander Motin , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , Ivan Voras Subject: Re: svn commit: r196777 - head/sys/dev/ahci X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:31:11 -0000 On Sep 3, 2009, at 2:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday 03 September 2009 3:45:07 pm Ivan Voras wrote: >> But ciss doesn't reference it at all so either it deviously assumes >> it >> or is independent of it. > > Actually, it may be much worse, it may be that the author of ciss(4) > new that > ciss(4)'s largest supported I/O size was larger than 128k so they > didn't > bother handling the limit at all giving the false impression the > hardware has > no limit. You're exactly right. The solution is to do a proper audit and fix the potential problems, not add yet another 1-off flag that avoids doing real work. If you want to help, keep in mind that I need help _generating_ patches, not testing them. I appreciate all of the testing goodwill out there, but analysis and fixing goodwill is needed at this phase. Scott