Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:40:18 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn <gary.jennejohn@freenet.de> To: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Increasing MAXPHYS Message-ID: <20100322124018.7430f45e@ernst.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <4BA6517C.3050509@FreeBSD.org> References: <4BA4E7A9.3070502@FreeBSD.org> <201003201753.o2KHrH5x003946@apollo.backplane.com> <891E2580-8DE3-4B82-81C4-F2C07735A854@samsco.org> <4BA52179.9030903@FreeBSD.org> <39C5864C-8A6B-4137-8743-D7B9F30F5939@samsco.org> <4BA6517C.3050509@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:03:56 +0200 Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > Scott Long wrote: > > Are there non-CAM drivers that look at MAXPHYS, or that silently assume that > > MAXPHYS will never be more than 128k? > > That is a question. > I only did a quick&dirty grep looking for MAXPHYS in /sys. Some drivers redefine MAXPHYS to be 512KiB. Some use their own local MAXPHYS which is usually 128KiB. Some look at MAXPHYS to figure out other things; the details escape me. There's one driver which actually uses 100*MAXPHYS for something, but I didn't check the details. Lots of them were non-CAM drivers AFAICT. -- Gary Jennejohn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100322124018.7430f45e>