From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Mar 22 19:46:42 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id TAA27320 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 22 Mar 1995 19:46:42 -0800
Received: from ix2.ix.netcom.com (ix2.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.3]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id TAA27311 for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 22 Mar 1995 19:46:39 -0800
Received: from  by ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.11/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
	id TAA12714; Wed, 22 Mar 1995 19:44:36 -0800
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 19:44:36 -0800
Message-Id: <199503230344.TAA12714@ix2.ix.netcom.com>
From: PVinci@ix.netcom.com (Paul Vinciguerra)
Subject: ata/ide sector translation modes c/h/s vs. LBA?
To: hackers@FreeBSD.org
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

I know you all must now be tired of all the ATA questions, but ...

Why does the ATA standard make such a big stink about LBA mode??	

As I see it, either way, you  have to translate either mode into:

	Sector Number
	Cylinder Low
	Cylinder High
	Dev/Head

So, how does LBA mode improve performance -- isn't it just a different 
set of calculations that need be done before *Each* command??  Am I 
missing something?

Paul