From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug  4 13:31:59 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A1A0137B401; Mon,  4 Aug 2003 13:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sandvine.com (sandvine.com [199.243.201.138])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AE91E43F3F; Mon,  4 Aug 2003 13:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from don@sandvine.com)
Received: by mail.sandvine.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
	id <305LHJJF>; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 16:31:58 -0400
Message-ID: <FE045D4D9F7AED4CBFF1B3B813C8533702742115@mail.sandvine.com>
From: Don Bowman <don@sandvine.com>
To: 'Scott Long' <scottl@freebsd.org>,
	Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 16:31:57 -0400 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
cc: "'freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>
cc: "'aic7xxx@freebsd.org'" <aic7xxx@freebsd.org>
Subject: RE: AIC7902 SCSI aborted command
X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: SCSI subsystem <freebsd-scsi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 20:32:00 -0000

> From: Scott Long [mailto:scottl@freebsd.org]
> Wilko Bulte wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 04:10:15PM -0400, Don Bowman wrote:
> > 
> >>From: Justin T. Gibbs [mailto:gibbs@scsiguy.com]
> >>>need larger spacing).  If your cable is shorter than this, 
> you might
> >>>consider trying something longer.
> >>
> >>Me & my trusty ruler re-measured the cable, and straightened out,
> >>it is 10.4" tip to tail, which matches the spec. I was foolishly
> >>thinking of the folded length.
> > 
> > 
> > It isn't too folded I hope? In the sense that you sometimes
> > find flatcables stashed in miniscule cutouts in cases etc. Not
> > too good for signal integrity either.
> > 
> 
> Except in cases where you need to slip through a tight slot and only a
> flat cable will do, the new-fangled round u320 cables are superior to
> their flat counterparts.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but for a single device on a chain, they
are equivalent. The round cable is really just the flat cable untwisted,
and its got the same amount of flat length @ each end.

I can believe the round ones are better for several drives on a
chain.

--don