On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote: > On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Matthias Andree <mand...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Am 27.03.2013 22:22, schrieb Alexander Motin: > >> Hi. > >> > >> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA > >> stack, using only some controller drivers of old ata(4) by having > >> `options ATA_CAM` enabled in all kernels by default. I have a wish to > >> drop non-ATA_CAM ata(4) code, unused since that time from the head > >> branch to allow further ATA code cleanup. > >> > >> Does any one here still uses legacy ATA stack (kernel explicitly built > >> without `options ATA_CAM`) for some reason, for example as workaround > >> for some regression? Does anybody have good ideas why we should not drop > >> it now? > > > > Alexander, > > > > The regression in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/157397 > > where the SATA NCQ slots stall for some Samsung drives in the new stack, > > and consequently hang the computer for prolonged episodes where it is in > > the NCQ error handling, disallows removal of the old driver. (Last > > checked with 9.1-RELEASE at current patchlevel.) > > We're talking about 10.x, so if you want it fixed, you need update > with 10.x information. > > Please put 10.x diagnostics in the PR.
Given Alexander also posted this to -stable, just for clarity, are we _only_ talking about 10.x here, or might this change get MFC'd to 9? cheers, Ian (dropping -current as I'm not subscribed so would only get bounced) _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
