Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" (Developers)
> Right, but this doesn't invalidate the need for a such call at all (the
> returned info may say something else than "physical hard disk" blah blah).
Do you have a specific protocol in mind? If this is something you're wanting, you probably need to come with a design/API/protocol and at least do an initial implementation for BIOS/kernel provided drives. Like I stated earlier, if I did it for USBDRIVE I would limit my scope to USB disks, and it sounds like you want much more than that.
> Missed the point, see above. That's why in file managers:
>
> - There is only 1 strategy
> - The user must pick the strategy
> - The user must reveal what volume is on what physical disk
> - Some "file managers" don't do the copying at all, they instead instruct
> the EXPLOITER to to the work for them
I'm not aware of any File Managers where the user is expected to "pick a strategy" or provide any information about the logical-to-physical relationships. Which File Manager(s) are you referring to?
Also, what EXPLOITER are you referring to? I've never seen that, either. I'm guessing that you are referring to a drive using its internal buffers to do the copy instead of actually transferring the data across the bus into RAM and back across the bus again? If that's the case, it would take much more intimate knowledge of how the disk works than the volume-to-physical relationships. You would have to know specific hardware details, like whether the disk even has an internal buffer that you can manipulate or not (e.g., USB flash drives don't, but USB-attached hard drives might).
Complete thread:
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - Laaca, 12.08.2010, 21:12 (Developers)
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - ecm, 12.08.2010, 21:24
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - Laaca, 13.08.2010, 01:46
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - Japheth, 13.08.2010, 07:31
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - bretjohn, 13.08.2010, 18:43
- EDIT: Protectmode handler called from realmode - bretjohn, 13.08.2010, 19:25
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 26.08.2010, 09:33
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - bretjohn, 26.08.2010, 19:03
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 27.08.2010, 03:25
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - bretjohn, 27.08.2010, 16:47
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 28.08.2010, 01:26
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - bretjohn, 28.08.2010, 16:35
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 06.09.2010, 20:10
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - bretjohn, 28.08.2010, 16:35
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 28.08.2010, 01:26
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - bretjohn, 27.08.2010, 16:47
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 27.08.2010, 03:25
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - bretjohn, 26.08.2010, 19:03
- Volumes vs physical storage media | WAS "Protectmod handl" - DOS386, 26.08.2010, 09:33
- EDIT: Protectmode handler called from realmode - bretjohn, 13.08.2010, 19:25
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - bretjohn, 13.08.2010, 18:43
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - Japheth, 13.08.2010, 07:31
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - Laaca, 13.08.2010, 01:46
- Protectmode handler called from realmode - ecm, 12.08.2010, 21:24