Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack?

Victor Balada Diaz victor at
Sun Mar 31 13:12:13 UTC 2013

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?


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

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.


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

More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list