Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-04 Thread Jordan K. Hubbard
We did. > Neal Westfall wrote... > > Not that I have one of these controllers, but I just received my 3.1 > > cd set in the mail today, and happened to notice that the Adaptec > > 152x controller is listed on the back as supported, along with the > > Tekram DC390 (and other AMD 53c974 based boards

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Warner Losh
In message <199903032050.naa86...@panzer.plutotech.com> "Kenneth D. Merry" writes: : The 152x boards are programmed I/O only, I believe. They don't do DMA. : So it won't matter if the driver is rewritten for CAM, you'll still get : lousy performance from the board. They can do DMA, but I don't t

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Brian Beattie
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > > It has pretty horrible performance problems on 2.2.8-STABLE, even when > > > using DMA: > > > > [...] > > > 4.4%Sys 91.9%Intr 3.7%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idl 4244 inact 204 pci irq9 > > > |||||||||| 5288 cache 1

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Kenneth D. Merry
Neal Westfall wrote... > Not that I have one of these controllers, but I just received my 3.1 > cd set in the mail today, and happened to notice that the Adaptec > 152x controller is listed on the back as supported, along with the > Tekram DC390 (and other AMD 53c974 based boards). I was sure that

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Neal Westfall
Not that I have one of these controllers, but I just received my 3.1 cd set in the mail today, and happened to notice that the Adaptec 152x controller is listed on the back as supported, along with the Tekram DC390 (and other AMD 53c974 based boards). I was sure that these were both still unsuppor

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
"Kenneth D. Merry" wrote: > > I think the chances are very slim that it will work soon with 3.x or 4.x. > It may get done at some point, but I don't think anyone is actively working > on it at the moment. Someone is reportedly "working" on it. Whether that is "actively" or not, I don't know... :-

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > What's the chance the Adaptec-152x controller (aic0) will soon work > with 3.1-STABLE? I just wish it was soon. I *so* wanted to be able to access external hd on my notebook and keep a local CVS tree (not to mention install X)... > It has pretty horrible performance pr

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Mikhail Teterin
> > It has pretty horrible performance problems on 2.2.8-STABLE, even when > > using DMA: > > [...] > > 4.4%Sys 91.9%Intr 3.7%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idl 4244 inact 204 pci irq9 > > |||||||||| 5288 cache 105 aic0 irq11 > > ==

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Brian Beattie
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > What's the chance the Adaptec-152x controller (aic0) will soon work > with 3.1-STABLE? > > It has pretty horrible performance problems on 2.2.8-STABLE, even when > using DMA: > > [...] > 4.4%Sys 91.9%Intr 3.7%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idl 4244 inact

Re: aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Kenneth D. Merry
Mikhail Teterin wrote... > What's the chance the Adaptec-152x controller (aic0) will soon work > with 3.1-STABLE? I think the chances are very slim that it will work soon with 3.x or 4.x. It may get done at some point, but I don't think anyone is actively working on it at the moment. > It has pre

aic0 and CAM

1999-03-03 Thread Mikhail Teterin
What's the chance the Adaptec-152x controller (aic0) will soon work with 3.1-STABLE? It has pretty horrible performance problems on 2.2.8-STABLE, even when using DMA: [...] 4.4%Sys 91.9%Intr 3.7%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idl 4244 inact 204 pci irq9 |||||||||