Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:45:08 +1000 From: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATA failure with 4.6.2 & 250GB drive? Message-ID: <200310160545.h9G5j8iP089823@app.auscert.org.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:26:01 MST." <200310150126.h9F1Q1BK063618@ice.nodomain>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> > FWIW, I have had _major_ problems (ie drive failure) when trying to use > > an 80 wire cable on a UDMA33 board with an ATA66 drive - I would recommend > > never using 80 wire cables on controllers that don't support UDMA66 or > > better. The reverse, using 80 wire cables on UDMA66 (or better) controllers > > with ATA33 drives is ok, however, and I've done that successfully. > > The only difference between 40 and 80 wire ATA cables are the extra 40 > wires which are all connected to ground and pin 34 in the host connector > which is not connected to the conductor in an 80 wire cable. The ANSI > ATA/ATAPI-5 standard says that "80-conductor cable assemblies may be used > in place of 40-conductor cable assemblies to improve signal quality ..." > (section 4.2.2.1). > > Unless someone can suggest a specific mechanism for the drive failures, > I would expect that your correlation between drive failures and using > 80 conductor cables with UDMA33 controllers was just coincidence. Thanks for the feedback. In that case, it may be that I had a dud cable - when I tested the cable at the time, it appeared to have continuity _between_ some pins - my assumption was that the controller coudn't handle that and, obviously (now), it couldn't. -- joel -- AusCERT, ITS, Uni of Qld, Australia -- hotline: [+61] [07] 33654417 my opinions in this email are not endorsed by AusCERT or Uni of Qld this message may not be onforwarded without my expressed permissionhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200310160545.h9G5j8iP089823>