Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:31:14 -0400
From:      Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Pieter de Goeje <pieter@degoeje.nl>, Lev Serebryakov <lev@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD problems and preliminary ways to solve
Message-ID:  <20110819203114.GF88904@in-addr.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108191946210.58323@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <slrnj4oiiq.21rg.vadim_nuclight@kernblitz.nuclight.avtf.net> <810527321.20110819123700@serebryakov.spb.ru> <201108191401.23083.pieter@degoeje.nl> <425884435.20110819175307@serebryakov.spb.ru> <20110819172252.GE88904@in-addr.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108191946210.58323@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 07:49:37PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
> >- improved driver support: a lot of users would benefit
> 
> For server/appliance-centric devices, we're going quite well.  For consumer 
> devices, less so.  However, it's generally the case that things have 
> dramatically improved in the last ten years: companies come to us with 
> drivers now, asking how to get them merged, and frequently their developers 
> get commit bits and maintain them in-tree even.  Compare this to 2000 when 
> we had hacked up Intel device drivers, and other than Adaptec, almost no 
> storage vendors closely involved in the project.

While on the most part I agree with the fact that a fair number of server
chips and chipsets are supported I think we are still missing key
components for truly reliable and scalable systems, including SAN
multipath support (yes, we have primitive support but it doesn't know about
limitations of different systems, e.g. HP EVA 5000s which do a LUN failover
if you query the LUN down the wrong path.  Yes, the EVA 5000 is an EOL
system but its an example of the issues a proper multipath solution should
solve.  I mean no offense to the authors of the current code either).  IPMI
boards/interfaces seems to be a constant problem and I'm not entirely
sure we have a good handle on SERDES support for NICs in blade systems.

Does the project or the foundation make any effort to directly engage with
manufacturers to ensure we have robust support for their products?

Gary



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110819203114.GF88904>