Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 22:08:55 +0200 From: Stefan Esser <se@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "Richard Seaman, Jr." <lists@tar.com> Cc: "hardware@FreeBSD.ORG" <hardware@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: TekRam DC-390 SCSI controllers - any ideas what chipset? Message-ID: <19970807220855.43151@mi.uni-koeln.de> In-Reply-To: <199708071958.OAA05616@ns.tar.com>; from Richard Seaman, Jr. on Thu, Aug 07, 1997 at 02:58:04PM -0500 References: <199708071958.OAA05616@ns.tar.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Aug 7, "Richard Seaman, Jr." <lists@tar.com> wrote: > >No, only current does, right now. I can provide anybody > >who can't way for Ultra-SCSI support to be merged into > >the -stable branch with a patch file, that brings the > > Do you mean "Ultra-SCSI" or "ultra-wide-SCSI"? C. Bowman indicates > ultra-wide, and you seem to support that but then refer to only > "ultra". Yes, Ultra implies Ultra-Wide, since the two concepts are orthogonal. Wide transfers need negotiation code and some special case code on disconnects, but don't depend at the transfer speed at all. Ultra needs the clock dividers to be set accordingly, but those don't infer with Wide. The negotiation of Wide transfers implies a fallback to asynchronous transfers until a new synchronous transfer rate (and more importantly a new "offset" value) is negotiated, but again, this is true for any synch. rate independently of Ultra transfer speeds ... Regards, STefan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970807220855.43151>