AHCI/ATA_CAM for dummies?

[b. f.]

On 12/14/09, b. f. <bf1783 at googlemail.com> wrote:
...
>>So far so good. :)  I am actually kind of curious as to why "device
>>ata" is needed, but it doesn't seem to be hurting anything.
>
> It is needed if you have AHCI hardware, and are operating in AHCI
> mode, but don't have ahci(4) in your kernel; or if you don't have AHCI
> hardware, or have AHCI hardware operating in legacy mode, and still
> want to use ATA devices.
>

I forgot to mention that ata(4) is also superfluous if you have
hardware that can use the  siis(4) driver, and that driver is in your
kernel.