** This is the quasi-official and semi-temporary T13 email list server. **
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:18:13 -0700, Larry Barras wrote:
>It was at *your* behest Hale, that the register response tables were
>changed so that atapi device 0 when answering for device 1 returned
>00h for every register read.
I am sorry but you are wrong. I have NEVER suggested or supported
this "non-standard" (going back to ATA-1) implementation. The I/O
response tables in ATA/ATAPI-6 were changed over my objections and
"no" votes. This was (and is) a very unwise change to the tables.
>Seriously, since I was the one pressing this, as far as I am
>concerned an atapi device-0 that answers for device-1 with an invalid
>signature in CL or CH for device-1 (to distinguish line d) is doing
>what I need for it to do.
Several suggestions/proposals were made during this lengthly
discussion, most do not require a hardware change, only a minor
firmware change, but apparently these were not confusing enough so
they were rejected in favor of the change we see in ATA/ATAPI-6.
>The rest of the time, I don't care what it does as long as it doesn't
>process commands or set values in the status/alt status registers
>when a non-existent device-1 is accessed.
I agree with this paragraph.
*** Hale Landis *** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
*** Niwot, CO USA *** www.ata-atapi.com ***
--
If you have any questions or wish to unsubscribe send a
message to Hale Landis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to
this list server send your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For questions concerning Thistle Grove Industries or TGI's
list services please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
