On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 09:45:52AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> There is one thing about later FreeBSDs which I am aware of: 48-bit LBA
> addressing. I'm left wondering if what you're running into is a bug or
> a problem with older FreeBSD (6.1) not supporting this. I would have to
> go back through CVS commit lots for ata(4) to find out when 48-bit LBA
> was added. I think 48-bit LBA support is required for disks >500GB.
The issue I'm referring to has been touched on many times.
First and foremost, 6.1-RELEASE was released in May 2006. Keep that
date in mind when reading the below.
The first incident, according to CVS commit logs, was adding 48-bit
LBA support, supporting disks >137GB. That would've been in
RELENG_4, dated 2002/01/05. FreeBSD 6.1 should have this.
Next, we have a commit dated 2003/01/19, affecting 48-bit LBA support
on Promise 66/100 controllers. FreeBSD 6.1 should have this.
Next, 2004/12/09, talking about disk firmware bugs affecting 48-bit LBA
addressing, which was affecting a significant number of users. That was
applied to HEAD and RELENG_5, so FreeBSD 6.1 ("HEAD" at that time)
should have this.
Next, 2005/04/14, something about "read back the real taskfile
register values when in 48-bit mode". Committed to HEAD, which would've
been during days shortly before RELENG_6 was tagged (6.0).
Next, 2005/08/17, "support for working around controllers that can't
do DMA in 48-bit LBA mode", forcing the disk to use PIO mode allowing
the disk to address >137GB. This was added to HEAD and RELENG_6, so
this should also exist in 6.1.
Next, 2007/12/13, "also fix 48-bit LBA addressing issues, apparently
newe chips need 16-bit writes and not the usual FIFO thing". This
was committed to HEAD first, RELENG_7 on 2008/01/09, and RELENG_6
on 2008/01/09.
This is one which FreeBSD 6.1 *would not* have fixes for.
I do not know if this is the problem -- I'm just speculating.
Because dmesg output was not provided ("nothing interesting"), we can't
tell what sort of controller your disks are hooked to, yadda yadda.
This is explicitly why I asked for that information.
If you could please try 7.0-STABLE or 7.1-PRERELEASE, that would be
highly recommended. It would at least allow us to determine if you're
being affected by a bug in older FreeBSD, or if this is something that
is unique to your environment or applies to present-day FreeBSD.
--
| Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com |
| Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ |
| UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA |
| Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
