On 18 Jul 2011 at 17:00, Mark McConnell wrote:
{Re: disable 64-bit dma for one PCI ...}:
On 18 Jul 2011 at 15:06, Scott Long wrote:
{Re: disable 64-bit dma for one PCI ...}:
I would like to disable 64-bit addressing for the SATA card, but
permit it for the SCSI card. Is this possible?
Am 19.07.2011 20:17, schrieb Artem Belevich:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:31 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
The only reason it might be nice to stick with two fields is due to the line
length (though the first line is over 80 cols even in the current format).
Here
are two possible
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:54:06AM +0200, Stefan Esser wrote:
The Rev column is required for of devices that are not uniquely
identified by their Vnd/Dev-IDs. (These used to exist, e.g. the Symbios
SCSI controllers, though I'm not aware of any device that needed a
different driver depending on
On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:54 AM, Stefan Esser wrote:
This is a very good idea, IMHO.
When I committed pciconf back in 1996 (it had been contributed by
gwollman) for PCI 1.0 (at a time when their was no standard for PCI to
PCI brigdes, yet ;-) ), the current format seemed sensible, but the
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:54:06AM +0200, Stefan Esser wrote:
Am 19.07.2011 20:17, schrieb Artem Belevich:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:31 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
The only reason it might be nice to stick with two fields is due to the
line
length (though the first line is
Am 20.07.2011 18:11, schrieb Scott Long:
On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:54 AM, Stefan Esser wrote:
This is a very good idea, IMHO.
When I committed pciconf back in 1996 (it had been contributed by
gwollman) for PCI 1.0 (at a time when their was no standard for PCI to
PCI brigdes, yet ;-) ), the
On 20.07.2011 18:25, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
The Rev column is required for of devices that are not uniquely
identified by their Vnd/Dev-IDs. (These used to exist, e.g. the Symbios
SCSI controllers, though I'm not aware of any device that needed a
different driver depending on the PCI revision
On 19.07.2011 1:22, Scott Long wrote:
Btw, I *HATE* the chip and card identifiers used in pciconf. Can we
change it to emit
the standard (sub)vendor/(sub)device terminology?
Oh, yeah. I hate that too. Would you want them as 4 separate entities or
to just rename the
labels to 'devid'
On 19/07/2011 07:56, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 19.07.2011 1:22, Scott Long wrote:
Btw, I *HATE* the chip and card identifiers used in pciconf. Can we change
it to emit
the standard (sub)vendor/(sub)device terminology?
Oh, yeah. I hate that too. Would you want them as 4 separate entities
On Monday, July 18, 2011 5:22:26 pm Scott Long wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 3:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Monday, July 18, 2011 5:06:40 pm Scott Long wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
I
On Jul 19, 2011, at 7:31 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
If we're going to change it, might as well break it down into 4 fields.
Maybe
we retain the old format under a legacy switch and/or env variable for users
that have tools that parse the output (cough yahoo cough).
The only reason it might
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:31 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
The only reason it might be nice to stick with two fields is due to the line
length (though the first line is over 80 cols even in the current format).
Here
are two possible suggestions:
old:
hostb0@pci0:0:0:0:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
I have two LSI raid cards, one of which (SCSI 320-I) supports
64-bit DMA when 4GB+ of DDR is present and another which
does not (SATA 150-D) . Consquently I've disabled 64-bit
addressing for amr devices.
I would
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
I have two LSI raid cards, one of which (SCSI 320-I) supports
64-bit DMA when 4GB+ of DDR is present and another which
does not (SATA 150-D) . Consquently I've disabled
On Monday, July 18, 2011 5:06:40 pm Scott Long wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
I have two LSI raid cards, one of which (SCSI 320-I) supports
64-bit DMA when 4GB+ of DDR is present and
On Jul 18, 2011, at 3:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Monday, July 18, 2011 5:06:40 pm Scott Long wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
I have two LSI raid cards, one of which (SCSI 320-I) supports
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 03:06:40PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
I have two LSI raid cards, one of which (SCSI 320-I) supports
64-bit DMA when 4GB+ of DDR is present and
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Scott Long sco...@samsco.org wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 3:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Monday, July 18, 2011 5:06:40 pm Scott Long wrote:
On Jul 18, 2011, at 12:02 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07:31 pm Mark McConnell wrote:
Dear folks,
On 18 Jul 2011 at 15:06, Scott Long wrote:
{Re: disable 64-bit dma for one PCI ...}:
I would like to disable 64-bit addressing for the SATA card, but
permit it for the SCSI card. Is this possible?
You'd have to hack the driver perhaps to only disable 64-bit DMA for
certain
PCI
19 matches
Mail list logo
