Re: ICH2-M IDE controller
It seems Benjamin Close wrote: > Hi All, > Is anyone looking at supporting the Intel ICH2-M IDE controller? Yes. > This controller is basically the same as the ICH2 controller except it has > extra powermanagment features as it's the for portable computers (hence > the M=mobile). I'm currently using the attached patch which runs > flawlessly on my laptop. However, I'm just an amature code hacker and > hence can't guarentee I haven't missed something between the chipsets. This patch seems about right, I have something very semilar in one of my trees here, just I havn't had a chance to test it yet, but if this works for you I guess I have my case :) > The other question I have is why in ata-dma.c is there the fall through to > the ICH chipset? It seems to prevent any drive actually using ATA100/UDMA5 > features. The fallthrough is just for modes less than ATA100 which is setup the same way as on the ICH therefore the same code.. -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: ICH2-M IDE controller
I think there are a few chips like that, that cannot do ATA100, but only vaguely remember hearing about it. - Original Message - From: "Benjamin Close" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 6:49 PM Subject: ICH2-M IDE controller > Hi All, > Is anyone looking at supporting the Intel ICH2-M IDE controller? > This controller is basically the same as the ICH2 controller except it has > extra powermanagment features as it's the for portable computers (hence > the M=mobile). I'm currently using the attached patch which runs > flawlessly on my laptop. However, I'm just an amature code hacker and > hence can't guarentee I haven't missed something between the chipsets. > > The other question I have is why in ata-dma.c is there the fall through to > the ICH chipset? It seems to prevent any drive actually using ATA100/UDMA5 > features. > > Cheers, > -- > * Benjamin Close > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
ICH2-M IDE controller
Hi All,
Is anyone looking at supporting the Intel ICH2-M IDE controller?
This controller is basically the same as the ICH2 controller except it has
extra powermanagment features as it's the for portable computers (hence
the M=mobile). I'm currently using the attached patch which runs
flawlessly on my laptop. However, I'm just an amature code hacker and
hence can't guarentee I haven't missed something between the chipsets.
The other question I have is why in ata-dma.c is there the fall through to
the ICH chipset? It seems to prevent any drive actually using ATA100/UDMA5
features.
Cheers,
--
* Benjamin Close
diff -u ./ata-dma.c fred/ata-dma.c
--- ./ata-dma.c Fri Mar 16 02:06:25 2001
+++ fred/ata-dma.c Sun Mar 25 10:33:52 2001
@@ -107,6 +107,7 @@
switch (scp->chiptype) {
+case 0x244a8086: /* Intel ICH2-M */
case 0x244b8086: /* Intel ICH2 */
if (udmamode >= 5) {
int32_t mask48, new48;
@@ -150,7 +151,8 @@
ata_printf(scp, device,
"%s setting UDMA4 on ICH%s chip\n",
(error) ? "failed" : "success",
- (scp->chiptype == 0x244b8086) ? "2" : "");
+ (scp->chiptype == 0x244b8086) ? "2" :
+ (scp->chiptype == 0x244a8086) ? "2-M" :"");
if (!error) {
mask48 = (1 << devno) + (3 << (16 + (devno << 2)));
new48 = (1 << devno) + (2 << (16 + (devno << 2)));
diff -u ./ata-pci.c fred/ata-pci.c
--- ./ata-pci.c Tue Mar 20 00:01:58 2001
+++ fred/ata-pci.c Sun Mar 25 10:30:58 2001
@@ -110,6 +110,9 @@
case 0x24118086:
return "Intel ICH ATA66 controller";
+case 0x244a8086:
+ return "Intel ICH2-M ATA100 controller";
+
case 0x244b8086:
return "Intel ICH2 ATA100 controller";
