Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:13:22 -0500 From: Brian McGovern <mcgovern@spoon.beta.com> To: Soren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk> Cc: qa@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DMA/66 not available for secondary IDE bus? Message-ID: <200010301413.e9UEDMu76771@spoon.beta.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 30 Oct 2000 08:27:51 %2B0100." <200010300727.IAA22815@freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Never mind. I'm on drugs. That, and the PC industry loves selling "identical" machines that aren't identical under the cover. I checked the chipset, and it only does ATA33, unlike the other machine I bought from the same place, same catalog number, same order, that does ATA66. One note of interest, then... You may want to remove: ata0-master: DMA limited to UDMA33, non-ATA66 compliant cable for chipsets that don't do ATA66, if you can tell. Its misleading. It implies that if one replaced the cable, one would get ATA66. Hence the confusion about why the secondary bus, which has the cable, wasn't doing it (no message at all). However, the kicker is: atapci0: <Intel PIIX4 ATA33 controller> port 0xc800-0xc80f at device 4.1 on pci0 which makes it clear. But, as mentioned, its "twin" does ATA66, so my bad. But, thats what I get for playing with things when I'm over tired. *feeling like a dumb QA guy* -Brian > It seems Brian McGovern wrote: > > This may be intentional, but I've noticed that if you have a non-UDMA66 device > > on the primary IDE bus, FreeBSD 4.x does not allow you to have UDMA66 on > > the secondary bus. > > Say what ? there is NO such limitation in the ATA driver.... > What chipset are we talking about here ? > > -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200010301413.e9UEDMu76771>