This message is from the T13 list server.
Tomato shields UP! Mark, this would be an IFF the device was less than 128/137GB and was exclusive to 48-bit command sets. Thus invoking LBA only. Now it becomes interesting? Now obsolete, so is many other commands, but you can still execute them. EDDs BEER PARTIES Let the pain begin. Andre Hedrick LAD Storage Consulting Group On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Mark Overby wrote: > 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 *** > >
