Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 08:52:24 +0300 From: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Daan Vreeken <Daan@vehosting.nl>, FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Phil Oleson <oz@nixil.net>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: WIP: ATA to CAM integration Message-ID: <4A373318.9000603@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200906152337.n5FNbQrI008014@apollo.backplane.com> References: <4A254B45.8050800@mavhome.dp.ua> <4A294DC3.5010008@mavhome.dp.ua> <200906051728.n55HSFf0076644@apollo.backplane.com> <200906152352.48231.Daan@vehosting.nl> <200906152209.n5FM9psY007070@apollo.backplane.com> <4A36CEE9.9040101@nixil.net> <200906152337.n5FNbQrI008014@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon wrote: > I think they mis-spoke. They are SATA-compliant and Port Multiplier > compliant, and they use FIS-based packets, so they pretty much do away > with all the ATA baggage, but they don't use the AHCI device interface > so they won't probe as an AHCI driver. > > I can see why they do it that way, though. It looks like they hide > most of the complexity behind the chipset, which is nice. AHCI > exposes a lot of that complexity. > > It looks like a reasonable chipset. Agree. It's functionally comparable to the latest AHCI specs, but looks more user-friendly. -- Alexander Motin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A373318.9000603>