Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 20:10:10 +0100 (CET) From: Søren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk> To: Dmitry Valdov <dv@dv.ru> Cc: sos@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATA driver feature request Message-ID: <200201201910.g0KJAAS03716@freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.1020120214931.23411A-100000@xkis.kis.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It seems Dmitry Valdov wrote: > Hi! > > Is it possible to do not disable UDMA-100 when there is UDMA-33 device at > the some IDE cable? The ATA driver doesn't disable UDMA100 if a UDMA33 device is on the same chain. The ATA driver disables UDMA > 33 if the device says it didn't find an 80pin cable. > w2k works fine with this hardware configuration with ATA-100. > FreeBSD limits both That is no indicator that it works, windows doesn't beat the disks nearly as hard as FreeBSD can do... > drives on the bus because there is 'non-ATA66 compliant cable'. > I've an Intel motherboard D815EFV. Intel documentation for this > board (FAQ section) says that it is possible to have ATA-100 and ATA-33 > devices at the some IDE bus/cable. Hmm, in most cases I've seen of this, using UDMA > 33 if the device says no leads to failures if you beat a bit on it, maybe because ti really means it :) > So, is it possible to make a kernel option to do not disable ATA-66/100 > in such cases? May be it will be with a BIG warning, but present. Please. Sure it is, I'll put it on my TODO list, but if this should be done the right way it takes more than just disabling the test... -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201201910.g0KJAAS03716>