IDE Master VS Slave settings

[dg]

I have been under the impression that setting drives as Master or Slave
doesn't make a difference in drive performance. I mean, the "Master"
doesn't really "Master" anything at all, right? Its just like calling them
A and B, or 0 and 1, or X, and Y, etc. Can anybody shed some light on this?

Thanks,
--Dan

 

[CJT]

I have been under the impression that setting drives as Master or Slave
doesn't make a difference in drive performance. I mean, the "Master"
doesn't really "Master" anything at all, right? Its just like calling them
A and B, or 0 and 1, or X, and Y, etc. Can anybody shed some light on this?

Thanks,
--Dan

I think that's right.

 

[Toshi1873]

@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>, (e-mail address removed)
says...

I have been under the impression that setting drives as Master or Slave
doesn't make a difference in drive performance. I mean, the "Master"
doesn't really "Master" anything at all, right? Its just like calling them
A and B, or 0 and 1, or X, and Y, etc. Can anybody shed some light on this?

The "master" device gets priority over the "slave" if
both want to use the bus at the same time... at least,
that's what I gleaned from a few minutes of googling.
No concrete link behind that assertion... so take that
with a large grain of salt.

It definitely has to do with the protocol that the two
devices employ so that they don't talk over-top of each
other.

http://thef-nym.sci.kun.nl/cgi-pieterh/atazip/atafq-
5.html#ss5.1

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

I have been under the impression that setting drives as Master or Slave
doesn't make a difference in drive performance.

I mean, the "Master" doesn't really "Master" anything at all, right?

Actually, it does in some stages such as drive POST.
The slave reports OK through master.

Its just like calling them A and B,

or 0 and 1,

That's the one.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

The "master" device gets priority over the "slave" if
both want to use the bus at the same time... at least,
that's what I gleaned from a few minutes of googling.
No concrete link behind that assertion...

so take that with a large grain of salt.

Yes, you'd better.

It definitely has to do with the protocol that the two
devices employ so that they don't talk over-top of each
other.

That assumes an initiator role for IDE devices.
There ain't.

http://thef-nym.sci.kun.nl/cgi-pieterh/atazip/atafq-
5.html#ss5.1

Can't even post a URL correctly.

 

[Mark M]

Can't even post a URL correctly.

I am sure you can work it out.