On Mon, Jun 28 2004, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
On Sat, Jun 26 at 1:31, Andre Hedrick wrote:
Eric,
There is no need for a new opcode.
The behavior is simple and trivial to support.
If standard flush_cache/ext were to behave just like standard data_in
taskfile register setup, yet use a non_data command state machine it would
be done.
Special case would be deal with LBA Zero and this would have to behave
like a complete device flush. Since flushing sector zero is not generally
done ... well this would go into a design debate and it is not my issue
nor my desire to enter one today.
28-bit would support max 256 sectors
48-bit would support max 65536 sectors
Anyone could write this simple proposal to T13 for SATA and T10 for SAS.
True, that would work just as well.
But as you mention, it isn't necessarilly what people want or think
they want or could actually use...
It would work, but it's still a lot nicer to not have to issue an extra
command to flush the range.