Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262437AbVCXKEu (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2005 05:04:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262767AbVCXKEt (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2005 05:04:49 -0500 Received: from outmail1.freedom2surf.net ([194.106.33.237]:50137 "EHLO outmail.freedom2surf.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262437AbVCXKEm (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2005 05:04:42 -0500 Message-ID: <42429244.1070903@qazi.f2s.com> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:11:16 +0000 From: Asfand Yar Qazi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041010 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: How's the nforce4 support in Linux? References: <3Lxis-5a0-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <3Lxis-5a0-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <3Lxis-5a0-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <3Lxis-5a0-27@gated-at.bofh.it> In-Reply-To: <3Lxis-5a0-27@gated-at.bofh.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1585 Lines: 42 Asfand Yar Qazi wrote: > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >>> * "hardware firewall" -- sounds silly. Pretty sure Linux doesn't >>> support >>> it in any case. >>> >> >> >> probably just one of those things implemented in the binary drivers in >> software, just like the "hardware" IDE raid is most of the time (3ware >> being the positive exception there) >> > > http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Previews/nvnforce4/3.html > > You're right there - some semi-hardware support combined with drivers > apparently result in lower CPU usage that software firewalls. Apparently. > > Actually, these people like it: > http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=712&pageID=1096 > > However one feature that you can't laugh at is the fact that it can be > made to block packets in the span of time between the OS being loaded > up, and the "real" firewall coming up. This small time span > theoretically leaves the PC vulnerable, so I think this is the only use > for "ActiveAmor Firewall". > > However, this doesn't answer my original question (which I suppose I > should have made clearer): can I get SATA II NCQ support in Linux with > an nForce 4 chipset? > > Argh already been answered. Another question: which add-in SATA RAID boards (preferably in PCI Express flavour) support NCQ fully and will be fully supported in Linux? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/