cam/scsi_da: active ssd quirks for all SAMSUNG MZ7* ssd

[nikita_elyzion.net]

Summary

I have just received a big bunch of samsun pm863a SSD. Unfortunately some of them have doesn't contain "SAMSUNG" in the beginning of their name so the current "SAMSUNG MZ7*" quirks is not enabled for them.

[19:36 root@sh-3-11-fbsd][~]# geom disk list da120 
Geom name: da120
Providers:
1. Name: da120
   Mediasize: 960197124096 (894G)
   Sectorsize: 512
   Stripesize: 4096
   Stripeoffset: 0
   Mode: r1w1e2
   descr: ATA SAMSUNG MZ7LM960
   lunid: 5002538c403291cc
   ident: S2E3NX0H601956
   rotationrate: 0
   fwsectors: 63
   fwheads: 255

[19:36 root@sh-3-11-fbsd][~]# geom disk list da121
Geom name: da121
Providers:
1. Name: da121
   Mediasize: 960197124096 (894G)
   Sectorsize: 512
   Mode: r1w1e2
   descr: ATA MZ7LM960HMJP0D3
   lunid: 5002538c404c4568
   ident: S37KNX0HC01189
   rotationrate: 0
   fwsectors: 63
   fwheads: 255

Note that, the SSD look totally identical on disk sticker...
Also, the disk FW is not identical and I cannot find an available FW to flash it but it's another subject.

[imp]

don't we also need this same quirk in ata_da.c?

[nikita_elyzion.net]

Now that you point it, yes I missed that part!
It will be difficult for me to test it, do you want that I path ata_da.c anyway ?

[bapt]

@nikita_elyzion.net yes :)

[imp]

In D13093#272254, @nikita_elyzion.net wrote:

Now that you point it, yes I missed that part!
It will be difficult for me to test it, do you want that I path ata_da.c anyway ?

Yes please. Compile testing is fine for that.

This points out, however, that artificial names generated by HBAs are a bit of an issue.... :(

The 4k quirk is in serious need of being revisited because we shouldn't have to do this except for a tiny tiny fraction of drives.

[nikita_elyzion.net]

In D13093#272417, @imp wrote:

In D13093#272254, @nikita_elyzion.net wrote:

Now that you point it, yes I missed that part!
It will be difficult for me to test it, do you want that I path ata_da.c anyway ?

The 4k quirk is in serious need of being revisited because we shouldn't have to do this except for a tiny tiny fraction of drives.

I totally agree on that.