On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 17:04 +0200, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > A Dimecres 22 Setembre 2004 15:55, Ron Johnson va escriure: > > On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 15:48 +0200, Leopold Palomo Avellaneda wrote: > > > A Dimecres 22 Setembre 2004 15:38, Paul Brook va escriure: > > > > On Wednesday 22 September 2004 14:11, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > I don't understand one thing, if the controller is on the mainboard, no > > > in a board connected to the pci bus, the information goes throught the > > > pci BUS? > > > > Having *sockets* isn't a requirement for being a bus. > > ??? Well, I have to admit that the my english isn't very good but I don't > understand the answer. I'm talking about to have a HD connected to a > controller integrated in the motherboard, not to a controller in a board > connected to a PCI bus. The on-board controller is *electrically* connected to the PCI bus. A board (whether HD controller, NIC, SCSI controller, sound card, etc) plugged into a PCI slot is also electrically connected to the PCI bus. Thus, to the OS, the on-board controller and the "board-based" controllers are PCI devices, and it does not see them any differently. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I had a crush on Elisabeth Sladen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part