This message is from the T13 list server.
too bad no one listened to me 2 years ago when I suggested we add a SATA/PATA bit to ID Device. Glad you managed to find a way to do it...sure would be easier to test a bit though wouldn't it. :-) gary laatsch > > From: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2004/08/30 Mon PM 02:13:01 EDT > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [t13] [RFC] detecting PATA device behind SATA bridge > > This message is from the T13 list server. > > > > So, I have stumbled into a situation where I must determine if a PATA or > SATA device is connected to a SATA controller. The only way a PATA > device would be connected to a SATA controller is through a PATA->SATA > bridge. > > There does not appear to be a "device is SATA" feature bit in IDENTIFY > DEVICE, so I have been forced to come up with hueristic: > > controller is SATA, and > cable is SATA, and > (ata version < 5 or word-93 is non-zero) > > Does this look like a good way to detect a PATA device attached to a > SATA controller? Can anyone shoot holes in my theory? > > > The reason I need this is that I have found two bridge/SATA-controller > combinations (not naming names) that will cause failures if the lba48 > command set is used to transfer more than 256 sectors per read/write... > even when the underlying PATA devices _do_ support lba48 large transfers. > > My OS driver must be able to detect a "transparent" PATA bridge in order > to limit transfers to 256 sectors. > > > Any insight into detecting a PATA device (versus a SATA device) is welcome. > > Jeff > > > >
