Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 27 Mar 2013 23:35:35 +0200
From:      Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Any objections/comments on axing out old ATA stack?
Message-ID:  <51536627.7090005@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130327213242.GA67876@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
References:  <51536306.5030907@FreeBSD.org> <20130327213242.GA67876@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27.03.2013 23:32, Steve Kargl wrote:
> 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?
>
> Yes, I use the legacy ATA stack.

On 9.x or HEAD where new one is default?

>> Does anybody have good ideas why we should not drop
>> it now?
>
> Because it works?

Any problems with new one?

-- 
Alexander Motin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51536627.7090005>