Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack?

[Peter Wemm]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Matthias Andree <mandree at 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.

-- 
Peter Wemm - peter at wemm.org; peter at FreeBSD.org; peter at yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV
bitcoin:188ZjyYLFJiEheQZw4UtU27e2FMLmuRBUE