From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Oct 21 15:13:40 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA13351
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 15:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from Octopussy.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE (Octopussy.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE [134.95.166.20])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13337
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 15:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from se@X14.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE)
Received: from x14.mi.uni-koeln.de ([134.95.219.124])
	by Octopussy.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27789;
	Wed, 22 Oct 1997 00:13:21 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from se@localhost) by x14.mi.uni-koeln.de (8.8.7/8.6.9) id AAA01028; Wed, 22 Oct 1997 00:13:26 +0200 (CEST)
X-Face: "<d]#=8pzx);RzeqSKI86OVa7=!0/(uRa.+B.9Z9\eNUn@UG?!`y7yt2dFNn%k4'.}](uE%
 yCO)$e&Y1%3EO~ifu6Q-#YUM&JZ't,}JkPnAz,8Dj33u%@GBi%[Y#LHz$]h7a<p4)-jKI7~sKjlP-^
 EvA[G;]v&0]W!EL%shs,{7x0|oqN4YVIs5,NI#,V{9"WF):5&RkOhyj*#-IAG}Tnu;YCF,d
Message-ID: <19971022001326.62136@mi.uni-koeln.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 00:13:26 +0200
From: Stefan Esser <se@FreeBSD.ORG>
To: Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: 2.2.2-RELEASE '875 SCSI won't negotiage
References: <joe@via.net> <199710210124.UAA14405@nospam.hiwaay.net> <19971021081759.TH50130@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.84
In-Reply-To: <19971021081759.TH50130@uriah.heep.sax.de>; from J Wunsch on Tue, Oct 21, 1997 at 08:17:59AM +0200
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On 1997-10-21 08:17 +0200, J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> wrote:
> As dkelly@hiwaay.net wrote:
> 
> > > sd0(ncr0:0:0): WIDE SCSI (16 bit) enabled
> > > sd0(ncr0:0:0): 20.0 MB/s (100 ns, offset 16)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't this report back 40.0 MB/s  for fast wide ultra ?
> > 
> > Probably should.
> 
> Probably should not.  It should read as ``20 MHz'', this makes no
> promises about the actual speed.

Yes, I've been thinking so for quite some time, to.
But I changed the message to report MB/s, anyway, on
popular demand :)

If 40MB/s is reported, you still won't be able to get
more than some 37MB/s moved, actually, but well, it is
the number claimed by the drive and controller vendors,
and so it can't be wrong to report it :)

Regards, STefan