![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, Jan 21 2002, Andre Hedrick wrote: > > I always thought it is like this (and this is what I still believe after > > having read the sprcification): > > > > --- > > SET_MUTIPLE 16 sectors > > --- > > READ_MULTIPLE 24 sectors > > IRQ > > PIO transfer 16 sectors > > IRQ > > PIO transfer 8 sectors > > --- > > > > Where am I wrong? > > > > By the way, the device *isn't* required to support any lower multiple > > count than the maximum one it advertizes. Ugly. > > No but the HOST is to obey the requirements of the device. > The spec is written from the drive side not the host side. > > "All Ye Hosts, SHALL address me in such a manner as described, or be > aborted or I SHALL remain in an undertermined state." > > Note only recently have the HOSTS been about to setup guidelines for what > is sane and not stupid for the device to do or behave. > > Again, the HOST(Linux) is not following the device side rules so expect > difficulty when we depart. The Brain Damage is how to talk to the > hardware, and it is clear we are not doing it right because we are bending > the rules stuff it into and API that not acceptable. However we are > stuck. Again, simplicity works, generate a MEMPOOL for PIO such that the > buffer pages are contigious and the 4k page dance is a NOOP. Until that > time we will be fussing about. Andre, Do you know how to say "I was wrong"? You are walking off-track again. It's clearly the way that Vojtech and I describe, otherwise current code would just not work. And 2.4, 2.2, 2.0 neither. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:15 [W:0.138 / U:0.010 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||