From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752338Ab1JKU5r (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:57:47 -0400 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:34724 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752039Ab1JKU5q (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:57:46 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mv_sas: OCZ RevoDrive3 & zDrive R4 support From: James Bottomley To: "Robin H. Johnson" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <1318032026-21913-1-git-send-email-robbat2@gentoo.org> <1318132024-12426-1-git-send-email-robbat2@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:57:43 -0500 Message-ID: <1318366663.2992.29.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 20:50 +0000, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 08:47:04PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > From: "Robin H. Johnson" > > > > In the OCZ RevoDrive3/zDrive R4 series, the "OCZ SuperScale Storage > > Controller" with "Virtualized Controller Architecture 2.0" really seems > > to be a Marvell 88SE9485 part, with OCZ firmware/BIOS. > > > > Developed and tested on OCZ RevoDrive3 120GB [PCI 1b85:1021] > > Is there anything blocking getting this ack'd or applied to the SCSI > tree? I've seen no comments from the lists. > > I've also posted it on the OCZ Forums, and gotten some users confirming > it works there. Well, when you put things like "NOT FOR COMMIT USE; TESTING ONLY; NO WARRANTY; DANGER!" and "I constructed this patch for my friend to test, completely blind. I haven't heard back from him at all yet, but I thought that the wider community might find it useful for testing as well. I think it _should_ work, just need to figure out what the correct chip variant is." On the patch it tends to make maintainers exercise extreme caution. Thus comments from others (preferably successful test reports) or acks from Marvell or Vertex would be very helpful. James