[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Parity - impications of not implementing this

To: "Daniel DeConinck" <daniel.deconinck@sympatico.ca>, <pci-sig@znyx.com>
Subject: Re: Parity - impications of not implementing this
From: "Monish Shah" <monishs_in@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 09:58:16 +0530
References: <001b01c0017f$4830b580$5f37d1d8@dan>
Sender: owner-reflector@www.pcisig.com

Dan,

People who design cards with flagrant violations of the PCI spec usually don't advertise that fact on this list. One such violation would be bad enough, but posting two back to back messages with such blatant violations is just asking to be flamed to death. :-)

As for parity, if someone plugs in your card in a platform that actually checks parity, you'll have problems.

Monish

----- Original Message -----

From: Daniel DeConinck

To: pci-sig@znyx.com

Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2000 2:56 AM

Subject: Parity - impications of not implementing this

Hello,

I have choosen not to implement the PAR feature of the PCI spec on a Target PCI card I have designed. It seems to work fine on wintel platforms as intended. Is there trouble lurking that would convince me to design in the PAR check ?

Sincerely

Daniel DeConinck

References:
- Parity - impications of not implementing this
  - From: "Daniel DeConinck" <daniel.deconinck@sympatico.ca>

Prev by Date: Re: PCI-to-PCI bridge
Next by Date: Re: C/BE[3:0] - PCI traget implementation
Prev by thread: Parity - impications of not implementing this
Next by thread: Re: Parity - impications of not implementing this
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread