Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:38:16 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> Cc: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Do we still need ATA disk CHS addressing? Message-ID: <86eirjbjl3.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: <200908101640.n7AGeYH0054650@fire.js.berklix.net> (Julian H. Stacey's message of "Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:40:34 %2B0200") References: <200908101640.n7AGeYH0054650@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> writes: > Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > Have anybody seen ATA drive without LBA support in last years? > Yes Have you really, or did you just assume that "old" means "no LBA"? > I run 20+ assorted hosts from 4.11 to 7.2 Uni & Dual proc, i386 (real 386= !) > to 686 & amd64 so I guess I'm=20 > A) Pretty vulnerable to legacy scare. > B) A litmus tesst for a wider community of others, some with older kit= ,=20 > not on lists or with bleeding edge latest hardware, but will=20 > get hit when stuff eg HCS gets declared legacy=3Ddumped. Do you seriously intend to run FreeBSD 9 on kit that is too old to support LBA? We're talking early nineties here. CHS doesn't scale past 504 MB, so any ATA disk larger than that must peforce support LBA. I bought my first 1 GB drive (Connor CFP1080) in 1995. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86eirjbjl3.fsf>