Eric Trimble wrote: > > When determining what protocol is spoken over a > physical connection > between a host controller and a drive (or other > peripheral), you look > for the highest common denominator - thus, a 2.0 > controller will speak > 2.0 when talking to a 3.0 peripheral, but will speak > 1.0 when talking to > a 1.0 peripheral.
So as an example, I have an Intel Motherboard DP35DP with 5 Sata and 1 E-Sata port. I have 2 sata disks connected to sata ports and an external E-Sata connected to the E-Sata port. Works on S10U8 with patches to about a year ago. When I do an LU to current patches, my current E-Sata disk disappears with the boot to the new patched environmnet and I have not been able to force the system to view the disk > > > When wondering whether a device is a chipset or a > physical layer change, > consider this: does the device actually change the > information being > transported through it, or does it merely change the > electrical form of > the message? Clearly something in the patched OS changed the driver from refusing to now enumerated a previously recognized device. > > Thus, the following would only change the electrical > form: > > eSATA - it changes the physical connector and cable, > but doesn't make > any other information change your comments seem orthogonal to my experience with my E-Sata device. Ben > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: usca22-123 > Phone: x17195 > Santa Clara, CA -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
