svn commit: r233274 - in head/sys/dev/ata: . chipsets

[Cy Schubert]

In message <20120326065004.GS37560 at alchemy.franken.de>, Marius Strobl 
writes:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 10:35:33PM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote:
> > In message <201203210857.q2L8vFLB062984 at svn.freebsd.org>, Marius Strobl 
> > writes:
> > > Author: marius
> > > Date: Wed Mar 21 08:57:15 2012
> > > New Revision: 233274
> > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/233274
> > > 
> > > Log:
> > >   Remove remnants of ATA_LOCKING uses in the ATA_CAM case and wrap it
> > >   along with functions, SYSCTLs and tunables that are not used with
> > >   ATA_CAM in #ifndef ATA_CAM, similar to the existing #ifdef'ed ATA_CAM
> > >   code for the other way around. This makes it easier to understand
> > >   which parts of ata(4) actually are used in the new world order and
> > >   to later on remove the !ATA_CAM bits. It also makes it obvious that
> > >   there is something fishy with the C-bus front-end as well as in the
> > >   ATP850 support, as these used ATA_LOCKING which is defunct in the
> > >   ATA_CAM case. When fixing the former, ATA_LOCKING probably needs to
> > >   be brought back in some form or other.
> > >   
> > >   Reviewed by:	mav
> > >   MFC after:	1 week
> > > 
> > > Modified:
> > >   head/sys/dev/ata/ata-all.c
> > >   head/sys/dev/ata/ata-cbus.c
> > >   head/sys/dev/ata/ata-pci.c
> > >   head/sys/dev/ata/ata-pci.h
> > >   head/sys/dev/ata/ata-queue.c
> > >   head/sys/dev/ata/chipsets/ata-acard.c
> > > 
> > [... diff removed for brevity ...]
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This commit broke kernels with device atapicam specified:
> > 
> > # ATA and ATAPI devices
> > device          atapicam        # emulate ATAPI devices as SCSI ditto via 
> > CAM
> >                                         # needs CAM to be present (scbus & 
> > pass)
> > 
> > Here are two examples when device atapicam is specified in the kernel 
> > config:
> > 
> 
> <...>
> 
> Apparently, you are using both "device atapicam" and "options ATA_CAM",
> which are mutually exclusive at run-time. As an intentional side-effect,
> r233274 breaks such configurations. The fact that you could compile
> both into the same kernel before was a bug, as ATA_CAM always took
> precedence.
> 
> > 
> > And, the patch to fix the issue:
> 
> No, this is backwards.

Cool, thanks. I've removed device atapicam from my configs. ;)


-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at komquats.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy at FreeBSD.org>   Web:  http://www.FreeBSD.org