On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, John D. Baker wrote:
> So, it seems the plan of action is to reboot the installed system
> (8.1_STABLE) in single-user mode, turn off autoconfig on the RAID
> and reboot the test kernel in single-user mode. Then I can observe
> the ahcisata behavior with respect to the RAID
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, John D. Baker wrote:
> I suppose also I can turn off autoconfig on the RAID before booting the
> test kernel (the config file is renamed so it won't be found by the
> 'rc' scripts).
>
> I have another machine with a local raidframe raid that I can test the
> procedure with
Rhialto wrote:
>On Sat 19 Oct 2019 at 08:16:02 -0700, Paul Goyette wrote:
>> If the module is built-in, it will never be loaded from the *.kmod file.
>> But as I pointed out above, disabling in userconf does NOT disable the
>> module, and does not prevent the module's initialization code from
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, Rhialto wrote:
On Sat 19 Oct 2019 at 08:16:02 -0700, Paul Goyette wrote:
If the module is built-in, it will never be loaded from the *.kmod file.
But as I pointed out above, disabling in userconf does NOT disable the
module, and does not prevent the module's initialization
On Sat 19 Oct 2019 at 08:16:02 -0700, Paul Goyette wrote:
> If the module is built-in, it will never be loaded from the *.kmod file.
> But as I pointed out above, disabling in userconf does NOT disable the
> module, and does not prevent the module's initialization code from
> executing.
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, John D. Baker wrote:
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, Paul Goyette wrote:
I want to be sure that a disabled built-in module won't cause a loadable
module to be loaded and defeat the disabling of the built-in "raid" device.
Disabling the raid device in userconf doesn't disable the
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, Paul Goyette wrote:
> > I want to be sure that a disabled built-in module won't cause a loadable
> > module to be loaded and defeat the disabling of the built-in "raid" device.
>
> Disabling the raid device in userconf doesn't disable the raidframe module.
> If the raidframe
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019, John D. Baker wrote:
I'm curious to see if changes to ahci_sata code in -current fixes the
problem in PR kern/54289. On the primary test machine I have it does
not.
The only other machine to exhibit the problem is my file server using
RAIDframe. I nearly lost the RAID
I'm curious to see if changes to ahci_sata code in -current fixes the
problem in PR kern/54289. On the primary test machine I have it does
not.
The only other machine to exhibit the problem is my file server using
RAIDframe. I nearly lost the RAID booting a netbsd-9 kernel when half
of the
