From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <509071940711191935n72d0ae6fv2f17458446142e27@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:35:23 -0500
From: "Anthony Sorace" <anothy@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: [9fans] SATA controller found by kernel but not 9load
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 02493c88-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I'm trying to install a new system and I've run into a problem: the
SATA controller is recognized fine by the kernel, but not by 9load.
The kernel tells me:

#S/sdE: ahci: port 0xe0000000: hba sss 0; ncs 31; coal 1; mports 3;
led 1; clo 1; ems 0
#S/sdE: sb600: sata-II with 4 ports

but 9load has nothing at all to say about it. Once I'm up with a
kernel (say, loaded off the CD which is still attached to (p)ATA and
works fine with 9load), I can access it without issue. In the normal
kernel, this is handled by sdiahci.c, which seems to be an older
version in 9load.

How straight-forward is it to move the kernel version of the driver
into 9load? I don't suppose anyone's already looked at that for this
device?

As an aside: how space-constrained are the kernels used for install
currently? It would be very nice to have fs(3) in there so an install
can be done with mirrored disks, rather than having to retrofit it
after the fact.
Anthony