SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

[Gord Peters]

Hi,

I was just wondering what the status of development is in regard to  
support for the Marvell 88SE6141 (ie. mv61xx) SATA-II controller is?   
This particular controller is included on the Asus P5WD2-E Premium  
motherboard.

I checked the mailing list archives, linux-ata.org, and also grepped  
through drivers/scsi/sata_mv.c in the 2.6.16 source (and the latest  
2.6.17 patches), but I could not find any mention of this particular  
chipset anywhere, so I'm hoping that this isn't a redundant question.

Thanks,
	Gord

PS. I'm not subscribed to the Linux kernel mailing list, so please CC  
me directly on any responses.

Re: SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

[Mark Lord]

Gord Peters wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was just wondering what the status of development is in regard to 
> support for the Marvell 88SE6141 (ie. mv61xx) SATA-II controller is?  
> This particular controller is included on the Asus P5WD2-E Premium 
> motherboard.

First I've heard of it.  Can you find docs for it?
If so, post a link to them, and we'll have a look to 
see what is different from the 60xx series.

Thanks

Re: SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

[Jeff Garzik]

Mark Lord wrote:
> Gord Peters wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was just wondering what the status of development is in regard to 
>> support for the Marvell 88SE6141 (ie. mv61xx) SATA-II controller is?  
>> This particular controller is included on the Asus P5WD2-E Premium 
>> motherboard.
> 
> First I've heard of it.  Can you find docs for it?
> If so, post a link to them, and we'll have a look to see what is 
> different from the 60xx series.

I would be willing to bet that it's either GEN-IIE or something that 
sata_mv doesn't cover at all (like AHCI).

	Jeff

Re: SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

[Mark Lord]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Mark Lord wrote:
>> Gord Peters wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was just wondering what the status of development is in regard to 
>>> support for the Marvell 88SE6141 (ie. mv61xx) SATA-II controller is?  
>>> This particular controller is included on the Asus P5WD2-E Premium 
>>> motherboard.
>>
>> First I've heard of it.  Can you find docs for it?
>> If so, post a link to them, and we'll have a look to see what is 
>> different from the 60xx series.
> 
> I would be willing to bet that it's either GEN-IIE or something that 
> sata_mv doesn't cover at all (like AHCI).

Yeah, could be.

Except I'd expect a more major change in their numbering scheme for that,
but, hey, who can predict what the marketing folks would do!

The motherboard description says something about it being Marvell's latest
chipset, with four SATA plus one PATA ports.  That'll be interesting..

Cheers  

Re: SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

[Gord Peters]

On 15-Jun-06, at 2:38 PM, Mark Lord wrote:

> The motherboard description says something about it being Marvell's  
> latest
> chipset, with four SATA plus one PATA ports.  That'll be interesting..


Yup, I can confirm this.  The Marvell chip appears to control 4 SATA  
+ 1 IDE connector.

Just to make things even weirder, there's also an Intel ICH7R chip on  
the motherboard which controls a separate set of 4 SATA + 1 IDE  
connector.

At first I thought that only the Marvell SATA ports could be used for  
a RAID (based on how they're labeled in the manual), but now I see  
that either set of SATA ports can be used for RAID.  So I may be able  
to set my RAID up using the ICH7R based ports until the Marvell chip  
is supported.  Am I correct to believe that the Intel ICH7R chip is  
supported in 2.6.16?

	Gord

Re: SATA: Marvell 88SE6141 support?

[Jeff Garzik]

Gord Peters wrote:
> At first I thought that only the Marvell SATA ports could be used for a 
> RAID (based on how they're labeled in the manual), but now I see that 
> either set of SATA ports can be used for RAID.  So I may be able to set 
> my RAID up using the ICH7R based ports until the Marvell chip is 
> supported.  Am I correct to believe that the Intel ICH7R chip is 
> supported in 2.6.16?


Neither are hardware RAID.  It's usually better to just use OS RAID.

	Jeff