17 May
2013
17 May
'13
2:35 p.m.
On 05/17/2013 05:03 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
Unless you have a microcontroller that has CML-based gigabit transceivers
(and some do, specifically usually for either PCIe or SATA), "lucky" is a
vast understatement. But SATA *is* pretty ATA-like once you get past the
physical layer; it's essentially ATA encapsulated over a different
I'm not an expert, but I thought it was more or less SCSI
encapsulated... aren't the O/S drivers in some cases closely related to
the SCSI drivers? (e.g. Linux')
For the most part, yes, but not full-blown SCSI. No command queuing,
no disconnect/reconnect, lack of pretty much everything that makes SCSI
perform better with multiple targets. It's close enough that most
everything treats it as a SCSI device.
True. I'm
just not too fond of IDE. ;)
Oh, IDE blows dog, there's no question about that amongst people
who have
any technical clue whatsoever. But it IS easy to interface to...I've
even
done it (as have many others) with a microcontroller and a few dozen
lines of
code. Try doing that with (for example) SATA...one would be lucky to
even
get the physical layer talking. There is *nothing* ATA-like about SATA
beyond the name. (who has written a PIC18 ATA/ATAPI library:
http://www.telegraphics.com.au/sw/product/picide )
Cool!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA