From: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl
To: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, andre@aslab.com
Cc: Gunther.Mayer@t-online.de, dhinds@zen.stanford.edu,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Patch(2.4.5): Fix PCMCIA ATA/IDE freeze (w/ PCI add-in cards)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 03:05:03 +0200 (MET DST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <UTC200106280105.DAA331227.aeb@vlet.cwi.nl> (raw)
From: Andre Hedrick <andre@aslab.com>
You know yourself first and all the screwed up ATAPI products that are
still using SFF-8020 that has been obsoleted before I start maintaining
the subsystem three plus years ago.
Hi Andre -
Why precisely is complying to SFF-8020 broken?
That was the standard. The standard that Microsoft required.
Other people made a different standard, and claimed that theirs
was better or more official or whatever, but reality is that
the products were not manufactured following this so-called
better standard.
You are a good disciple of Hale, but it is no use ignoring the
fact that a very large number of devices was made following SFF-8020.
These devices are not necessarily screwed, they tend to work fine,
although both ATA and ATAPI devices have their quirks.
SFF-8020, later INF-8020, became part of ATA/ATAPI-4 (1998).
The T13 people that merged SFF-8020 and produced ATA/ATAPI-4
changed a few details about how a master is supposed to react
when a nonexistent slave is selected. Nobody really noticed,
and ATA/ATAPI-5 still had the same requirements. But then long
discussions about this difference caused ATA/ATAPI-6 to go back
to the original SFF-8020 requirements. Do you disagree with this
description of history? If you agree then it is not SFF-8020
but ATA/ATAPI-4 and ATA/ATAPI-5 that today must be considered broken
in this respect. I am referring to Section 9.16.1 of these standards.
Maybe there are other things in SFF-8020 that you consider broken?
Andries
next reply other threads:[~2001-06-28 1:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-28 1:05 Andries.Brouwer [this message]
2001-06-28 3:39 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-06-30 10:05 ` Jens Axboe
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-06-26 20:20 Gunther Mayer
2001-06-27 7:29 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-06-27 11:25 ` Alan Cox
2001-06-27 16:54 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-06-27 17:21 ` Alan Cox
2001-06-27 20:01 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-06-27 20:51 ` Gunther Mayer
2001-06-27 21:55 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-06-27 16:03 ` David Hinds
2001-06-27 16:56 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-06-27 16:23 ` Gunther Mayer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=UTC200106280105.DAA331227.aeb@vlet.cwi.nl \
--to=andries.brouwer@cwi.nl \
--cc=Gunther.Mayer@t-online.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=andre@aslab.com \
--cc=dhinds@zen.stanford.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®