NCQ support NVidia NForce4 (CK804) SATAII
Michael Thonke
I would like to ask what the plans/timeplan to implement NCQ support for
NVidia NForce4(CK804) SATAII based chipsets? Fact is that is it possible
to use NCQ with NForce4 SATAII on Windows system, I wonder why it isn't
support by libata? Is there something in your git-tree? Or what are the
reasons/problems behind that libata is missing NCQ support for (CK804)
SATAII?
Greets and
Best regards
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majo...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Jeff Garzik
> Hello Jeff,
>
> I would like to ask what the plans/timeplan to implement NCQ support for
> NVidia NForce4(CK804) SATAII based chipsets? Fact is that is it possible
> to use NCQ with NForce4 SATAII on Windows system, I wonder why it isn't
> support by libata? Is there something in your git-tree? Or what are the
> reasons/problems behind that libata is missing NCQ support for (CK804)
> SATAII?
Ask NVIDIA. They are the only company that gives me -zero- information
on their SATA controllers.
As such, there are -zero- plans for NCQ on NVIDIA controllers at this time.
Jeff
Michael Thonke
> Michael Thonke wrote:
>
>> Hello Jeff,
>>
>> I would like to ask what the plans/timeplan to implement NCQ support
>> for NVidia NForce4(CK804) SATAII based chipsets? Fact is that is it
>> possible to use NCQ with NForce4 SATAII on Windows system, I wonder
>> why it isn't support by libata? Is there something in your git-tree?
>> Or what are the reasons/problems behind that libata is missing NCQ
>> support for (CK804) SATAII?
>
>
> Ask NVIDIA. They are the only company that gives me -zero-
> information on their SATA controllers.
I thought of that.. *sigh*
>
> As such, there are -zero- plans for NCQ on NVIDIA controllers at this
> time.
Could it be possible to make reverse engeneering? I think they should
work as the SATA-IO SATAII specification says.
Jeff, I will also contact NVidia to ask for specification or information
about it.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
/Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Michael Thonke
> Ask NVIDIA. They are the only company that gives me -zero-
> information on their SATA controllers.
>
Hello again,
Jeff, did you found any informations about NForce4 SATA Controller?
I found a Product Brief/Specification and a Blockdiagramm.
Also found out that the CK804 supports TCQ/NCQ
-> snip
nForce4 Ultra and nForce4 SLi can support tagged command queuing and
native command queuing when used with SATA hard disks that support
these features
-->
> As such, there are -zero- plans for NCQ on NVIDIA controllers at this
> time.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
If NVidia followed the SATA-IO spec than should be possible to make them
work with NCQ, or do I think wrong of that?
Or isn't it possible?
/Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Allen Martin
> > Ask NVIDIA. They are the only company that gives me -zero-
> > information on their SATA controllers.
>
NVIDIA won't be documenting nForce4 SATA controllers, so Linux NCQ
support for nForce4 is unlikely. I'm hoping this will change with
future products.
> > As such, there are -zero- plans for NCQ on NVIDIA
> controllers at this
> > time.
>
> Could it be possible to make reverse engeneering? I think they should
> work as the SATA-IO SATAII specification says.
The SATA-IO SATA-II specification says nothing about host controller
implementations. Intel documents a host controller implemetnation in
the AHCI specification which is becoming an industry standard, but
nForce4 SATA is not AHCI.
-Allen
Allen Martin
> mean many
> people using NVIDIA based mainboards. And that against that what I
> thought NVidia stands for - Linux friendly but seems only that this
> statement fit on graficcards? Is there no "responsible" person that
> says...Hello, Linux is a growing market that we need to
> serve? With full
> driver/program support?
>
Likely the only way nForce4 NCQ support could be added under Linux would
be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
especially for storage / boot volume. We decided it wasn't worth the
headache of a binary driver for this one feature. Future nForce
chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
open about documenting it.
Lennart Sorensen
> Likely the only way nForce4 NCQ support could be added under Linux would
> be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
> especially for storage / boot volume. We decided it wasn't worth the
> headache of a binary driver for this one feature. Future nForce
> chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
> open about documenting it.
I never have been able to understand how some hardware that seems so
simple can possibly have anything secret in it. 3D video drivers I can
understand, sound chips I can't (well DSP algorithms maybe, but not
plain doing input.output), network chips should be real simple, and well
ide/sata controllers don't seem like they should be very complex to
program either.
But what do I know... I find it hard enough to get specs for some
network chips under NDA when you are actually buying the darn chips from
the company. Some companies appear to fail to realize they are
_hardware_ companies making money selling hardware, not intellectual
property companies.
Well it will be nice to see fully open SATA/IDE controllers in future
nvidia chipsets. I guess I will put off upgrading my athlon 700 until
those come out. :)
Len Sorensen
Gábor Lénárt
Hmm, I can't understand this. I want to buy a new system including
motherboard with some Athlon64 CPU. I was told that nforce4 chipset is the
"right" choice. However I'm using *only* Linux (well, sometimes BSDs,
Solaris and such) and I have *never* had windows installed on any of my
computers. Also I know *lots* of relatives/friends/collegues/etc using Linux
or other UNIX only or at least mainly. Deciding not to support the need of
these people mean market loss, even if you count the publish info and/or
source code to eg build and/or extend a storage driver will *NOT* effect any
other company or such, at least I can't understand why a company afraid
releasing info to support some stuff ... Well ok, maybe a 3D video card is
another topic, but now we're only talking about NCQ which needs some port
read/write operations and such (at least I can beleive this, I do direct hw
IDE programming back to the time of 286s).
Seriously, should I avoid motherboards with nvidia chipset? Or what can I
do? Everybody says "OK, next product will be better for your needs", but
I need my new machine *NOW* ...
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 01:53:47PM -0700, Allen Martin wrote:
> > Erm, why they are not willing to support NCQ under Linux...I
> > mean many
> > people using NVIDIA based mainboards. And that against that what I
> > thought NVidia stands for - Linux friendly but seems only that this
> > statement fit on graficcards? Is there no "responsible" person that
> > says...Hello, Linux is a growing market that we need to
> > serve? With full
> > driver/program support?
> >
>
> Likely the only way nForce4 NCQ support could be added under Linux would
> be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
> especially for storage / boot volume. We decided it wasn't worth the
> headache of a binary driver for this one feature. Future nForce
> chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
> open about documenting it.
--
- Gábor
Lee Revell
> I want to buy a new system including
> motherboard with some Athlon64 CPU. I was told that nforce4 chipset is
> the "right" choice. However I'm using *only* Linux
Who told you that? Some Windows user?
It's common knowledge that Nvidia is not Linux friendly. Their business
is making hardware so people can play games on Windows. Anything that
their lawyers think might have a 0.0001% chance of interfering with that
business model in the slightest bit will not happen.
Lee
Michael Thonke
>>Erm, why they are not willing to support NCQ under Linux...I
>>mean many
>>people using NVIDIA based mainboards. And that against that what I
>>thought NVidia stands for - Linux friendly but seems only that this
>>statement fit on graficcards? Is there no "responsible" person that
>>says...Hello, Linux is a growing market that we need to
>>serve? With full
>>driver/program support?
>>
>>
>>
>
>Likely the only way nForce4 NCQ support could be added under Linux would
>be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
>especially for storage / boot volume.
>
Who won't have drivers for Linux? Who told you that..?
It would be a start point if closed or not closed source but say never
ever as your mail suggest is not a way to go.Whats about Servers that
using NForce Based Chipsets and they need NCQ? Always saying not needed
or so hard to hand out specs..is the lazy way that a company like NVidia
shouldn't go.
> We decided it wasn't worth the
>headache of a binary driver for this one feature.
>
Yes,you Nvidia decide..what's about the costumer dosn't the costumer
option counts? It's the A and the O of costumer relationship.
Holding up a possiblity is better than say: "Oh, the costumers buy our
hardware but have no right to use it at all."
So I paid 120€ for a NVidia Nforce4 and 3 Mainboard..and what..I can't
use it correctly only in Windows?
NVidia seems only interesseted in GPU market so they hand out a bit of
drivers...mh they are also closed source..so the argument you offered
aboved is senseless...because NVidia do so for quite a long time.
> Future nForce
>chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
>open about documenting it.
>
>-Allen
>
>
>
So this was the last piece of NVidia I bought...about 400 Workstation
..is not the worth.
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Michael Thonke
>On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 09:09 +0200, Gábor Lénárt wrote:
>
>
>>I want to buy a new system including
>>motherboard with some Athlon64 CPU. I was told that nforce4 chipset is
>>the "right" choice. However I'm using *only* Linux
>>
>>
>
>Who told you that? Some Windows user?
>
>
(1.)
There is no other way to use a nearly good chipset for AMD64 cpus.
Via's chipsets are really buggy not acceptable, so what else ULi/Ali who
cares where to buy?
Any hardware from them on european market..can't see them until yesterday.
>It's common knowledge that Nvidia is not Linux friendly. Their business
>is making hardware so people can play games on Windows.
>
(2.)
This is not correct, not everybody play games only on windows or only
buy hardware for gaming..
reasons please look at (1.)
> Anything that
>their lawyers think might have a 0.0001% chance of interfering with that
>business model in the slightest bit will not happen.
>
>Lee
>
>
*ironic*
Mh so I should take my lawyer and say..hey NVidia cheated me..can't use
there hardware completly under Linux but I bought it and can't use it
correctly.
*ironic off*
>
>
>
Sum it up either use Intel and Intel Hardware or die on Linux...*frustrated*
Greets & Best regards
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Lee Revell
> *frustrated*
Hey I don't like it any more than you do. But Nvidia is an IP company
and they act like one. Most of us would probably do the exact same
thing in their position, AKA whatever the lawyers tell them ;-)
Lee
Michael Thonke
>On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 17:17 +0200, Michael Thonke wrote:
>
>
>>*frustrated*
>>
>>
>
>Hey I don't like it any more than you do. But Nvidia is an IP company
>and they act like one. Most of us would probably do the exact same
>thing in their position, AKA whatever the lawyers tell them ;-)
>
>Lee
>
>
>
>
Jepp Lee your are right.
Well, the lawyers sometimes like cancer..nobody wants them nobody need
them, but they still there. *hard ironic* Couldn't we tie all togehter,
to make the world better? To make more hardware loving Linux? And peace
on earth *ironic off - taken from Miss Hardware Support election live
from Germany*
But omitting a costumer in some decisions could break there neck..
If we would have such company we would may do something like that, but
hey..saying my Hardware is Linux friendly is much cooler :-)
And mh some goverments and schools using AMD and NForce Chipsets..this
is a lost market..they are blind?
In my old school we had 200 + 100 computers with NForce2..and they
wanted to move to Linux OS..but can't..sharing my knowledge stuck at the
point of driver support from NVidia for Linux so the problem was on the
root (hardware). Now they changed to Intel and what happen no NVidia
anymore - isn't the worth would NVidia say right?
Greets & Best regards
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Diego Calleja
Michael Thonke <iogl...@gmail.com> escribió:
> There is no other way to use a nearly good chipset for AMD64 cpus.
> Via's chipsets are really buggy not acceptable, so what else ULi/Ali who
> cares where to buy?
HP, Sun & friends seem to use AMD chipsets (AMD64 has a serious lack of
support from "serious" chipset makers - many people do argue
that the nvidias are far from being "good" chipsets) and they seem to
support linux, but it's not easy to find motherboards for amd64 cpus
with amd chipsets on them. Good chipsets seems to be one of
the reasons why some people keeps buying intel...
Roger Heflin
For high end stuff Serverworks is supposed to have some
AMD stuff soon (this is rumor I heard).
From what Allen said, the implication to me is that something
in the current NVIDIA stat NCQ chipset is *not* fully under
NVIDIA's control, ie they got some piece of technology from
someone else and cannot disclose its details, which would be
why the could release a "clean" redesigned one.
Roger
Michael Thonke
>For high end stuff Serverworks is supposed to have some
>AMD stuff soon (this is rumor I heard).
>
>
If there where some pieces for desktop from AMD orignially I would take
them..but
they don't offer...that's the point...to cry.
Like Intel offer ..Intel CPU + Intel Chipset best combination overall ATM.
>>From what Allen said, the implication to me is that something
>in the current NVIDIA stat NCQ chipset is *not* fully under
>NVIDIA's control,
>
What the sell hardware they can't support or develop driver for it..
okay that's the point why many windows users complain about Data corruption.
Thanks for raising this point.
> ie they got some piece of technology from
>someone else and cannot disclose its details, which would be
>why the could release a "clean" redesigned one.
>
> Roger
>
>
>
A bit late or not? What we have done to get this punishment?
I love Linux and I won't move from it because of it...loyality :-)
Jeff Garzik
> There is no other way to use a nearly good chipset for AMD64 cpus.
> Via's chipsets are really buggy not acceptable, so what else ULi/Ali who
> cares where to buy?
What specifically does not work, on VIA+AMD64 combination, under Linux?
My Athlon64 with VIA chipset works great.
Jeff
Lennart Sorensen
> What specifically does not work, on VIA+AMD64 combination, under Linux?
>
> My Athlon64 with VIA chipset works great.
Mine does too. Asus A8V Deluxe. No problems so far. Everything on the
board I have tried just works.
Can't say my A7N8X-E Deluxe has any real issues either. I may only get
ac97 audio level out of the nifty DSP, but I hardly use sound on the
system anyhow, so I don't mind. forcedeth driver works for networking,
sil3112a sata works with WD drives no problem, nvidia ide controller
seems to work fine with dvd drives, firewire works, yukon sk98lin works
too, usb is fine. No complaints from me.
Len Sorensen
Michael Thonke
> Michael Thonke wrote:
>
>> There is no other way to use a nearly good chipset for AMD64 cpus.
>> Via's chipsets are really buggy not acceptable, so what else ULi/Ali
>> who cares where to buy?
>
>
>
> What specifically does not work, on VIA+AMD64 combination, under Linux?
I have a ASUS A8V Deluxe too, and can't use the AMD X2 processor on
it...this is a feature..right?
Supposed to run with DualCore but don't post..hm.
>
> My Athlon64 with VIA chipset works great.
My SATA II devices. Get not regonized from the VIA SATA
controller...this bug is known.
So I want to use my HDD's I bought ...why should I set my SATA II device
to be SATA I.
Is also a feature of VIA Chipsets, right?
>
> Jeff
>
>
"It's not a bug, hey let's say is a feature."
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Michael Thonke
>On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 01:20:56PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>
>>What specifically does not work, on VIA+AMD64 combination, under Linux?
>>
>>My Athlon64 with VIA chipset works great.
>>
>>
>
>Mine does too. Asus A8V Deluxe. No problems so far. Everything on the
>board I have tried just works.
>
>
AMD X2 DualCore?
>Can't say my A7N8X-E Deluxe has any real issues either. I may only get
>ac97 audio level out of the nifty DSP, but I hardly use sound on the
>system anyhow, so I don't mind. forcedeth driver works for networking,
>sil3112a sata works with WD drives no problem, nvidia ide controller
>seems to work fine with dvd drives, firewire works, yukon sk98lin works
>
>
Yes, Marvell, Silicon Image no problem as they provide OpenSource drivers.
On a normal setup is nearly everything okay.
I hold up a hardware testlab to find b** *features* the specification
don't show/hold.
Things that can go scary for production usage - that's my job.
>too, usb is fine. No complaints from me.
>
>
USB works also great for all chipsets :-)
>Len Sorensen
>
>
>
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Lennart Sorensen
> AMD X2 DualCore?
If you buy me one I will try it. :)
> Yes, Marvell, Silicon Image no problem as they provide OpenSource drivers.
> On a normal setup is nearly everything okay.
>
> I hold up a hardware testlab to find b** *features* the specification
> don't show/hold.
That sounds like it could be complicated work.
> Things that can go scary for production usage - that's my job.
I just want the machines I buy to work. So far they do. I try to check
for support before buying any hardware.
> USB works also great for all chipsets :-)
That I wouldn't be 100% sure about. I remember reading about USB
problems on a few chipsets in the past.
Len Sorensen
Jeff Garzik
> I have a ASUS A8V Deluxe too, and can't use the AMD X2 processor on
> it...this is a feature..right?
> Supposed to run with DualCore but don't post..hm.
What does ASUS say about this? You can't just plug a new processor into
an old motherboard and expect it to work, generally.
> My SATA II devices. Get not regonized from the VIA SATA
> controller...this bug is known.
> So I want to use my HDD's I bought ...why should I set my SATA II device
> to be SATA I.
Please enable ATA_DEBUG and ATA_VERBOSE_DEBUG, and send me the output.
SATA II devices can be used on SATA I controllers just fine, with no
need to tweak settings.
Jeff
Michael Thonke
> Michael Thonke wrote:
>
>> I have a ASUS A8V Deluxe too, and can't use the AMD X2 processor on
>> it...this is a feature..right?
>> Supposed to run with DualCore but don't post..hm.
>
>
> What does ASUS say about this? You can't just plug a new processor
> into an old motherboard and expect it to work, generally.
Hello Jeff,
No they don't like AMD x2 DualCore cpus. ASUS is not interesseted in the
bugs I found...Silicon Image helped me to get Samsung SATA II drivers
working on the Sil3132 chip and gave me a update/firmware. But ASUS
...what should I say? They say no problem encountered by us so
far...don't use linux...and thorw off the phone..while you want to
talk..*sigh*
>
>
>> My SATA II devices. Get not regonized from the VIA SATA
>> controller...this bug is known.
>> So I want to use my HDD's I bought ...why should I set my SATA II
>> device to be SATA I.
>
And nope they don't work, no drive which with SATAII operate without
tweak on VIA Southbridges..SATA controller.
Hitachi,Samsung,WD
I refer to the article of heise.de
This article from heise.de is german sorry...but maybe you understand
what they wrote
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/62189
Haven't found a
>
> Please enable ATA_DEBUG and ATA_VERBOSE_DEBUG, and send me the output.
I tried that Jeff, but the base problem is on the low-level..
Like the one I ound with Sil3132.
>
>
> SATA II devices can be used on SATA I controllers just fine, with no
> need to tweak settings.
>
> Jeff
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Lennart Sorensen
> I have a ASUS A8V Deluxe too, and can't use the AMD X2 processor on
> it...this is a feature..right?
> Supposed to run with DualCore but don't post..hm.
Well according to Asus you can if you run BIOS 1013 or 1014 on the
board. Any less and it won't boot.
Now I certainly can't try it given I don't have such a CPU.
> My SATA II devices. Get not regonized from the VIA SATA
> controller...this bug is known.
> So I want to use my HDD's I bought ...why should I set my SATA II device
> to be SATA I.
So a SATA II drive doesn't work at all?
> Is also a feature of VIA Chipsets, right?
>
> "It's not a bug, hey let's say is a feature."
Common practice it seems.
Len Sorensen
Michael Thonke
>On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 07:38:12PM +0200, Michael Thonke wrote:
>
>
>>I have a ASUS A8V Deluxe too, and can't use the AMD X2 processor on
>>it...this is a feature..right?
>>Supposed to run with DualCore but don't post..hm.
>>
>>
>
>Well according to Asus you can if you run BIOS 1013 or 1014 on the
>board. Any less and it won't boot.
>
>
What they say is escapist - far away..
>Now I certainly can't try it given I don't have such a CPU.
>
>
>
Well, don't go to holiday and spend the money for this genial CPU.
>>My SATA II devices. Get not regonized from the VIA SATA
>>controller...this bug is known.
>>So I want to use my HDD's I bought ...why should I set my SATA II device
>>to be SATA I.
>>
>>
>
>So a SATA II drive doesn't work at all?
>
>
Jep. On VIA chipsets..it would be to flacky to say SATA II drives
doesn't work at all.
But its like the Smart-Table and what vendors implement and who did the
interpretation of specs:-) It's like a fairy tale..the hardware fairy tale.
>
>
>>Is also a feature of VIA Chipsets, right?
>>
>>"It's not a bug, hey let's say is a feature."
>>
>>
>
>Common practice it seems.
>
>
"Wouldn't be the would in there, the world would be boring."
>Len Sorensen
>
>
>
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Jeff Garzik
> Jeff Garzik schrieb:
>> Please enable ATA_DEBUG and ATA_VERBOSE_DEBUG, and send me the output.
>
>
> I tried that Jeff, but the base problem is on the low-level..
There may be a BIOS problem, but there is no problem with the controller
using SATA II drives.
Can you boot with another drive, and then send the output requested above?
Jeff
Andi Kleen
> Michael Thonke wrote:
> > There is no other way to use a nearly good chipset for AMD64 cpus.
> > Via's chipsets are really buggy not acceptable, so what else ULi/Ali
> > who cares where to buy?
>
>
> What specifically does not work, on VIA+AMD64 combination, under Linux?
The only known problem is the broken IOMMU, but unless you have >3GB
of memory and plan to use highspeed devices that can only address 4GB
that should not make muc difference.
-Andi
Michael Thonke
> Michael Thonke wrote:
>
>> Jeff Garzik schrieb:
>>
>>> Please enable ATA_DEBUG and ATA_VERBOSE_DEBUG, and send me the output.
>>
>>
>>
>> I tried that Jeff, but the base problem is on the low-level..
>
>
>
> There may be a BIOS problem, but there is no problem with the
> controller using SATA II drives.
>
> Can you boot with another drive, and then send the output requested
> above?
Sorry, but I can't provide them, because I changed the VIA chipset based
mainboard against a NForce4 Ultra chipset mainboard.
But on heise.de they also pointed out that it's VIA's bug. Not the
harddrives one, they have some but this not apply on VIA. Samsung act
and updated the firmware of their drives for compatibility reasons.
And the work-around is to jumper the hdd as SATA I hdd. The problem was,
that my system to this time was not bootable with my Samsungs Hd160JJ
and VIA VT8237. Nos they fix it with a new Chipset the VT8327R...where
we don't need a work-around.
<http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/southbridge/vt8237/>
>
> Jeff
>
Michael
--
Michael Thonke
IT-Systemintegrator /
System- and Softwareanalyist
-
Heikki Orsila
> USB works also great for all chipsets :-)
Not here. I've had plenty of problems with VIA K8T800 USB, but only
with USB mass storage devices:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2915
Otherwise the chipset has worked very well. Only one crash in
a year, and that was with a recent 2.6.13-rc[2-5] TCP bug, which has
already been fixed.
--
Heikki Orsila Barbie's law:
heikki...@iki.fi "Math is hard, let's go shopping!"
http://www.iki.fi/shd
Gábor Lénárt
> HP, Sun & friends seem to use AMD chipsets (AMD64 has a serious lack of
? As far as I know, Ultra20 uses nforce4 chipset at least according to some
pdf donwloaded from Sun's site.
Also please note that here I would like to have a *desktop* Linux system,
not a server, if it counts.
--
- Gábor
Jan Engelhardt
>>From what Allen said, the implication to me is that something
>in the current NVIDIA stat NCQ chipset is *not* fully under
>NVIDIA's control, ie they got some piece of technology from
>someone else and cannot disclose its details, which would be
>why the could release a "clean" redesigned one.
Bäh. They really lack originality.
Jan Engelhardt
--
Andre Tomt
> Jeff Garzik schrieb:
>
>> Michael Thonke wrote:
>>
>>> There is no other way to use a nearly good chipset for AMD64 cpus.
>>> Via's chipsets are really buggy not acceptable, so what else ULi/Ali
>>> who cares where to buy?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What specifically does not work, on VIA+AMD64 combination, under Linux?
>
>
> I have a ASUS A8V Deluxe too, and can't use the AMD X2 processor on
> it...this is a feature..right?
> Supposed to run with DualCore but don't post..hm.
Upgrade BIOS.
--
Cheers,
André Tomt
Willem Riede
> Likely the only way nForce4 NCQ support could be added under Linux would
> be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
> especially for storage / boot volume. We decided it wasn't worth the
> headache of a binary driver for this one feature. Future nForce
> chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
> open about documenting it.
That is disappointing. I was seriously considering a motherboard with your
chipset because of its impressive specifications, but now I have to
reconsider (I'm one of those folks that never bought an nVidia graphics
board due to the lack of open full-function driver). I _hate_ not being
able to use all features.
Any chance your company will reconsider? Are you in a position to make
that decision? Is there a VP I can write to (politely) to support the case?
I don't understand your reluctance in this case (I do for your graphics
processors) - it's not as if adding this function to sata_nv would
expose your crown jewels - you write yourself that next time you'd use a
different (better) interface...
Regards, Willem Riede.
Lion Vollnhals
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 20:54:35 +0000, Allen Martin wrote:
>
> > Likely the only way nForce4 NCQ support could be added under Linux would
> > be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
> > especially for storage / boot volume. We decided it wasn't worth the
> > headache of a binary driver for this one feature. Future nForce
> > chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
> > open about documenting it.
>
> That is disappointing. I was seriously considering a motherboard with your
> chipset because of its impressive specifications, but now I have to
> reconsider (I'm one of those folks that never bought an nVidia graphics
> board due to the lack of open full-function driver). I _hate_ not being
> able to use all features.
I agree.
I am considering buying an nForce4 board, too.
But i am discouraged by it's closed source nature.
Lion Vollnhals
Christopher Chan
> be with a closed source binary driver, and no one really wants that,
> especially for storage / boot volume. We decided it wasn't worth the
> headache of a binary driver for this one feature. Future nForce
> chipsets will have a redesigned SATA controller where we can be more
> open about documenting it.
This one feature can make a big difference to whether your higher end
NForce Professional chips will even be considered for low/mid range
servers. Now that some NCQ support is starting to appear in libata,
people will be looking to elsewhere for motherboards that offer NCQ
support under Linux. If Nvidia had provided a binary driver, who knows
how many would now be using boxes that have NForce Professional chips?
Stephen Frost
> Am Sonntag, den 14.08.2005, 09:29 -0400 schrieb Willem Riede:
> > On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 20:54:35 +0000, Allen Martin wrote:
> > That is disappointing. I was seriously considering a motherboard with your
> > chipset because of its impressive specifications, but now I have to
> > reconsider (I'm one of those folks that never bought an nVidia graphics
> > board due to the lack of open full-function driver). I _hate_ not being
> > able to use all features.
>
> I agree.
>
> I am considering buying an nForce4 board, too.
> But i am discouraged by it's closed source nature.
I also agree and am rather disappointed by this news. Unfortunately,
I've already bought an A8N-SLI. I've been considering some nvidia-based
systems for work though and now plan to ask my vendor
(penguincomputing.com in this case) if this will be an issue with their
systems or not.
Thanks,
Stephen
Chris Wedgwood
> I also agree and am rather disappointed by this news.
> Unfortunately, I've already bought an A8N-SLI.
If you can send it back citing the driver issues as the reason.
Linux sales are probably a tiny blip on the radar for them so I don't
expect this to make a big difference immediately but keeping constant
pressure of vendors like nvidia about openness is probably the best we
can do right now (obviously this means avoiding buying their products
as much as possible).