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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 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 permission
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200310160545.h9G5j8iP089823>