From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bogus LBA48 drives Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 13:58:09 -0500 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <406B14C1.8000708@pobox.com> References: <20040331183410.GA3796@pclin040.win.tue.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:36545 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262311AbUCaS62 (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2004 13:58:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20040331183410.GA3796@pclin040.win.tue.nl> List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Andries Brouwer Cc: Andre Hedrick , Geert Uytterhoeven , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Lionel Bergeret , JunHyeok Heo , Linux Kernel Development , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Andries Brouwer wrote: > Hmm. I read in my copy of ATA7: > > 6.16.55 Words (103:100): Maximum user LBA for 48-bit Address feature set > Words (103:100) contain a value that is one greater than the maximum LBA > in user accessable space when the 48-bit Addressing feature set is supported. > The maximum value that shall be placed in this field is 0000FFFFFFFFFFFFh. > Support of these words is mandatory if the 48-bit Address feature set is supported. > > Do you read differently? The errata is, one needs to check that field for zero, and use the other one if so... Jeff