This message is from the T13 list server.
What's even more disturbing about this is that a nationally accredited standards committee continues to make decisions on the content of the specification based on this bigoted assumption and that the supervisor of this committee allows this to occur. 1/22/02 11:06:46 AM, "Hale Landis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >This message is from the T13 list server. > > >Curtis said... >>The interrupt is truely not a requirement for UDMA. > >Just to expand on this... INTRQ is not required by any ATA or ATAPI >reset or command protocol. A host can chose to ignore INTRQ anytime. > >But I think the point of the original question was missed here... I >think the question concerns a piece of host side hardware, hardware >not for use in a WinTel system, hardware not for use on a system >running WinXX, that does not connect to the INTRQ signal. So whatever >"system" this is (could be a digital camera, MP3 player, ?) it >probably has no need to use INTRQ. It probably uses only PIO at low >data transfer rates. > >(I have said this many times before) There are a large number of >ATA/ATAPI devices that are not used in your normal WinTel system... >It is unfortunate that T13 continues to ignore these applications of >ATA/ATAPI devices and continues to be totally beholding to the WinTel >world. The responses to the original question clearly show that many >T13 people immediately jumped to the conclusion that ignoring INTRQ >would not work in a WinTel system, probably without ever thinking >that this could be some other application for an ATA/ATAPI device >that has nothing to do with the WinTel world. > >Sigh... > > >*** Hale Landis *** www.ata-atapi.com *** > > > >*** Hale Landis *** www.ata-atapi.com *** > > > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe instructions can be found at www.t13.org. > Subscribe/Unsubscribe instructions can be found at www.t13.org.
