Re: Sony DRU-510A, cannot burn dvd's on Solaris9 x386
>From appro@fy.chalmers.se Wed Jan 21 01:31:01 2004
>> >> >> from all the tests I've run .. I know it's a buffer overrun.
>> >>
>> >> >Buffer overruns are *not* denoted with "INVALID ADDRESS FOR WRITE," and
>> >> >should be handled by application transparently. *Unhandled* buffer
>> >> >underruns in turn *are* denoted as depicted in originating post. How do
>> >> >you come to the conclusion that it's overrun condition?
>> >>
>> >> This is definitely wrong!
>>
>> It is obvious that "INVALID ADDRESS FOR WRITE" is a possible
>> result of a buffer underun.
>Do I have to explain the difference between "buffer overruns" and
>"buffer underruns?" I wrote "buffer *underruns* are denoted as depicted
>in originating post." And what did orignating post say? "INVALID ADDRESS
>FOR WRITE!"
Well, slowly it seems that we become able to understand each other....
Buffer overruns should never happen if the firmwar eof the drive is OK.
Buffer full conditions only happen if you are in RAW mode and writing the LEAD IN
of a CD and (with some drives) when the first DVD write is stalled in order
to write the DVD TOC when in SAO mode. Then you need to manually
perform flow control in the writing application. Cdrecord does this
(cdrdao is e.g. known not to do it and for this reason cdrdao is unable
to write a CD in RAW mode to a Pioneer writer).
But in case of use level flow control, the drive returns a Not Ready key.
>From the MMC standard, the observed problem may only occur in restricted
overwrite mode in case the write instruction is not properly alligned.
I cannot see that Invalid address for write may happen with linear DVD
writing execept when you need to abort the write.
>> I don't know what you mean by handling buffer underrun transparently in an
>> application?
>It surely depends on the fact you didn't care to *read*. I wrote "buffer
>*overruns* are handled transparently," and not "buffer *underruns* are
>handled transparently." Also note that my "how do you come to conclusion
>that it's overrun condition?" was addressed to the requestor who stated
>"it's buffer *overrun*," not to you.
If you would try to write in a different style it would be much easier
to understand what you mean. Note that I did assume several times that
you are writing in a agressive style and later you told me that I seem
to have missunderstood you.....
>I can't remember myself saying that DAO is worse. I said that other
>modes, both non-DAO DVD- and DVD+ ones, are more *practical*, yet
>provide for *adequate* compatibility with legacy DVD-ROM. In addition I
>maintain that DVD+ is more practical/easier to deploy than DVD-. My
>standpoint is and has always been that any technology deserve a trial
>and noone should jump to conclusions before that actually give it a real
>try.
Well I did try DVD+ and I still have the impression that it is worse than
DVD-.
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Reply to: