This message is from the T13 list server.
Not to start a heated discussion or anything, but wouldn't a device that is compliant with the ATA-7 standard be "prohibited" (note the quotation marks) from using CHS as CHS is now obsolete? -----Original Message----- From: Hale Landis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 9:01 AM To: ATA T13 Reflector Subject: Re: [t13] 48-bit LBA: Purpose of ID Word 86, bit 10 (vs ID 83, bit 10) This message is from the T13 list server. On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:27:28 -0800, Gary Laatsch wrote: >This message is from the T13 list server. >We were going to address this stuff (or at least some of it) as part of >the PARTIES-2 document. There were issues raised a year and 1/2 ago about >48 bit mode and how certain devices indicated 48 bit supported and enabled >(words 83 and 86 bit 10) even though they were less than 137GB and which >commands should be used and what the contents of word 100-103 should be, >etc. etc. Why is this discussion needed? Support for LBA48 has *NOTHING* to do with the capacity of the device. A device with only 10 sectors can support CHS, LBA28 *_AND_* *_LBA48_*. What is the problem? Hale *** Hale Landis *** www.ata-atapi.com ***
