From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Aug 29 15:23:23 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id PAA26722
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 15:23:23 -0700
Received: from chrome.onramp.net (chrome.onramp.net [199.1.166.202])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id PAA26715
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 15:23:20 -0700
Received: from localhost.jdl.com (localhost.jdl.com [127.0.0.1]) by chrome.onramp.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA06678; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 17:18:44 -0500
Message-Id: <199508292218.RAA06678@chrome.onramp.net>
X-Authentication-Warning: chrome.onramp.net: Host localhost.jdl.com didn't use HELO protocol
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
cc: vak@cronyx.ru, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: wd0 detect fails 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 30 Aug 1995 06:51:12 +1000."
             <199508292051.GAA00059@godzilla.zeta.org.au> 
Reply-To: jdl@chromatic.com
Clarity-Index: null
Threat-Level: none
Software-Engineering-Dead-Seriousness: There's no excuse for unreadable code.
Net-thought: If you meet the Buddha on the net, put him in your Kill file.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 17:18:43 -0500
From: Jon Loeliger <jdl@chrome.onramp.net>
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

Apparently, Bruce Evans scribbled:
> [ code ] 
>
> >I'm not sure that this code is 100% correct.
> >Old version did not work for some CD-ROMs,
> >current one seems to fail for some disks. :-(
> 
> >Unfortunately, ATA specs cannot help much here,
> >just as ATAPI specs cannot help in CD-ROM probing.
> >Manufacturers never read specifications. :-)
>
> A user reported that the status was 0x52 for the old code (0x02 = IDX).
> The spec says 0x50 :-).
> 
> We could ignore some bits, perhaps all except 0x51, but the old code
> essentially ignored all except 0x50 (and BUSY).  Why did it fail exactly?

With minor cable finagling here, I can easily, :-(, construct a failing
probe case.  Would you like to go a few rounds with me on this one?
I was getting the CDROM detect failure when trying to put the CDROM 
as the only device of the wdc1 controller.  (The wdc0 had either 1 or 2
drives on it.)

Is this the failure mode you were interested in?


> >If so, what about removing the ATAPI option and enable ATAPI
> >support by default?

Cool!


jdl