Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

AHCICD.SYS alternatives? (Users)

posted by tom Homepage, Germany (West), 13.01.2021, 23:22

> Jack asked me to convey the following message:
>
> > In his post above, my "good friend" Tom Ehlert says:
>
> > > Jack absolutely refused to implement AHCI because
> > > "AHCI is too complicated".
>
> > Tom is misinformed as usual. The major reasons why
> > I refused to put AHCI in my drivers are (A) AHCI was
> > supposed to offer "legacy" mode, to make writing new
> > drivers optional, and (B) AHCI is actually worthless
> > for DOS, as DOS handles I-O requests "one at a time"
> > and cannot "queue" them, which AHCI needs to improve
> > speed. I decided NOT to complicate my drivers; DOS
> > runs exactly the same with "legacy" AHCI or standard
> > SATA controllers, since both are actually identical!
> > If cheap mainboard vendors are now dropping "legacy"
> > AHCI support, fault all of THEM, and not me!!
I abbreviated (and maybe oversimplified).

Jack Ellis, 15 Mrz 2012:


"As I have noted, (A) AHCI is USELESS for DOS, as DOS does "One at a
time" I-O and cannot make use of AHCI's much-touted "Native command
queuing", and (B) AHCI is RIDICULOUSLY complex, the obvious results
of it being designed by a [MISERABLE!] "ANSI committee" which tried
to satisfy EVERYBODY and in the end satisfied NOBODY, as-usual! I
have REFUSED to implement actual AHCI in UIDE/UIDE2, and I shall do
so for as long as "IDE compatibility" mode exists -- I have NO wish
to double my drivers' I-O logic and so reduce their cache capacity,
"Por NADA!" [for NOTHING], since DOS can never use AHCI queuing!"

the conclusion remains the same: no, Jack Ellis drivers won't support AHCI.

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22049 Postings in 2034 Threads, 396 registered users, 164 users online (0 registered, 164 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum