Re: Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack?

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> 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?

Hello,

At my previous job we had troubles with NCQ on some controllers. It caused
failures and silent data corruption. As old ata code didn't use NCQ we just=
 used
it.

I reported some of the problems on 8.2[1] but the problem existed with 8.3.

I no longer have access to those systems, so i don't know if the problem
still exists or have been fixed on newer versions.

Regards.
Victor.

[1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/muc.lists.freebsd.stable/dAMf0=
28CtXM
-- =

La prueba m=E1s fehaciente de que existe vida inteligente en otros
planetas, es que no han intentado contactar con nosotros. =

_______________________________________________
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"