On 04/19/10 02:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On 18 Apr 2010, at 14:05, Alexander Motin wrote:
>>> Most of AHCI controllers could also work as usual PCI ATA, but not every
>>> PCI ATA could work as AHCI. It would be nice to compare `pciconf -lvbc`
>>> output in both working (Rui)
On 19 Apr 2010, at 07:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
Rui Paulo wrote:
On 18 Apr 2010, at 14:05, Alexander Motin wrote:
Most of AHCI controllers could also work as usual PCI ATA, but not
every
PCI ATA could work as AHCI. It would be nice to compare `pciconf -
lvbc`
output in both working (Rui)
Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2010, at 14:05, Alexander Motin wrote:
>> Most of AHCI controllers could also work as usual PCI ATA, but not every
>> PCI ATA could work as AHCI. It would be nice to compare `pciconf -lvbc`
>> output in both working (Rui) and not working (Michael) cases.
>
> ah...@pci0
On 18 Apr 2010, at 14:05, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On 18 Apr 2010, at 06:57, Alexander Motin wrote:
>>> Rui Paulo wrote:
On 17 Apr 2010, at 23:12, Michael Butler wrote:
> On 04/17/10 18:05, Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/18/10 01:57, Alexander Motin wrote:
> More important probably would be `pciconf -lvcb`.
>
> Intel controllers after ICH6 change both ID and set of resources,
> depending on AHCI enabled in BIOS. There is separate set of IDs for
> controllers wit
Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2010, at 06:57, Alexander Motin wrote:
>> Rui Paulo wrote:
>>> On 17 Apr 2010, at 23:12, Michael Butler wrote:
On 04/17/10 18:05, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
>> The revision labeled:
>>
>> SVN rev 206755 on 201
On 18 Apr 2010, at 06:57, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On 17 Apr 2010, at 23:12, Michael Butler wrote:
>>> On 04/17/10 18:05, Rui Paulo wrote:
On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
> The revision labeled:
>
> SVN rev 206755 on 2010-04-17 11:40:39Z by rpa
Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2010, at 23:12, Michael Butler wrote:
>> On 04/17/10 18:05, Rui Paulo wrote:
>>> On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
The revision labeled:
SVN rev 206755 on 2010-04-17 11:40:39Z by rpaulo
Add another ICH7M chipset that works.
>>
On 17 Apr 2010, at 23:12, Michael Butler wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/17/10 18:05, Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> The revision labeled:
>>>
>>> SVN rev 2
On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The revision labeled:
>
> SVN rev 206755 on 2010-04-17 11:40:39Z by rpaulo
>
> Add another ICH7M chipset that works.
>
> .. is incorrect and will cause some laptops to not boot.
So, in AHCI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/17/10 18:05, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2010, at 22:34, Michael Butler wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> The revision labeled:
>>
>> SVN rev 206755 on 2010-04-17 11:40:39Z by rpaulo
>>
>> Add another ICH7M chi
It's generally also a good idea to cc the author of the change just in
case they don't get to their -current mail in a timely manner.
hth,
Doug
--
... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
-- Propellerheads
Improve the effectiveness of you
12 matches
Mail list logo