On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 12:59 +0900, Kazuyuki Sato wrote:
> Hi, Christian,
>  
> What is the model number of MacBook Pro? 
> 
>   Confirm method:
>       $ smbios | grep -i mac              
>         Product: MacBookPro5,3
>         Family: MacBook Pro

I have a:

  Product: MacBookPro5,2

> 
> nvidia (MCP79) chipsets model?
> from my experience...

Yes, MCP79.

> 
> I think,  'pci-ata' and 'ata' driver as one possibility. 
> If there is a corresponding part to the output of prtconf as follows. 
> --
> # prtconf -D 
> ...snip
>         pci-ide, instance #0 (driver name: pci-ide)
>             ide, instance #0 (driver name: ata)
>                 cmdk, instance #0 (driver name: cmdk)
>             ide, instance #1 (driver name: ata)
>                 sd, instance #0 (driver name: sd)
> ...snip
> --

Yes, I have that part.

> 
> It is not possible to explain in detail though it is convinced that this is 
> related. 
> sorry.
> 
> However, I tried one experiment. 
> ahci driver was used instead of pci-ide and ata driver, and it succeeded. 
> performance has improved compared with pci-ide driver, and suspend/resume
> became fast by using ahci driver.resume is completed at about 10 seconds. 
> 
>   Reference information:
> 
>       CR 6818983:  Please support ahci driver with nvidia MCP79.
>       http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=7055
> 
>       After it changes:  
>       --
>       # prtconf -D
>         pci10de,cb79, instance #0 (driver name: ahci)
>             disk, instance #1 (driver name: sd)
>             cdrom, instance #2 (driver name: sd)
>       --
> 
> 
> If it is interested, Please download the snv_126_ahci_hack.iso file.
> its bootable iso file.(about 3.8GB file and slow line ...  )

Ugh, that's huge :-)

> 
>       
> http://solaris.sunfish.suginami.tokyo.jp/blog/patch/ahci_hack/snv_126_ahci_h
> ack.iso
>       # Please use this only to experiment, and not the one to guarantee 
> operation. 
> 
> I confirmed worked by MacBook Unibody 13" Late2008 and MacBook Pro 15" 
> Mid2009. 
> Both are nvidia chipset. 
> 
> However, this demand was not able to be accepted. Because it contradicts the 
> specification. 
> Please refer to CR 6818983 for details.

Hmm.  As the bug is Closed/Will Not Fix, what is the real fix for this
problem then?

-- Christian

Reply via email to