Subject: Re: recommended 939-board
To: Petar Bogdanovic <email@example.com>
From: Dieter <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/10/2005 10:05:10
> > What isn't "real deal" about the nForce-chipset? (I must have missed
> that thread.)
> The following Mails are the most recent ones:
Booting from CD/DVD (PATA) works fine for me. (But then I don't have an
Adaptec SATAConnect controller plugged in.)
The SATA drives work fine with a recent kernel. (2.0.2 works if you turn off
APIC in firmware, but newer works better and doesn't need APIC turned off.
I'm running a -current kernel from a few weeks ago.)
> > The nforce4 boards were the only ones I could find that supported
> SATA's NCQ.
> Erm.. you just wrote a few days ago, that NCQ seems to be unsupported by
When NetBSD supports NCQ, I can drop new bits in and have NCQ.
Performing surgery on a VLSI chip to add NCQ would be quite the
> > The only "not configured" in NetBSD's dmesg are:
> > Nvidia nForce4 Memory Controller (miscellaneous memory, revision
> 0xa3) at pci0 dev 0 function 0 not configured
> > Nvidia nForce4 SMBus (SMBus serial bus, revision 0xa2) at pci0 dev 1
> function 1 not configured
> > Nvidia product 0x0057 (miscellaneous bridge, revision 0xa3) at pci0
> dev 10 function 0 not configured
> What is this anyway? I suppose, the last one has something to do with
> nVidias 'ActiveArmour'-Firewall..
I don't know what they are. I suspect that the temp sensors may be on
the SMBus, but I haven't gotten that far yet. I do want to monitor
temps eventually, but the board runs very cool, so it isn't top priority.
> > I haven't tried the onboard Ethernet or audio yet.
> Could you do that for me? ;)
They're on the list (as are the temp sensors), they just haven't made it
to the top yet.