Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:55:10 -0700 (PDT) | From | Andre Hedrick <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4 Status |
| |
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 13:41:01 -0700 (PDT) > From: Andre Hedrick <andre@linux-ide.org> > > > Is there a good reason why we don't have the chipset tuning enabled all > > the time? i.e., but another way, is there a downside to having it be > > enabled all the time? > > You haven't answered my question....
In the past yes now there is no reason not to default it to active tuning. With the new get out break point for unknown north and south bridge combinations, thinks are better.
> > It's nice if we can avoid situations where if users don't config their > > kernels correctly with the right config options, their reward is a > > trashed disk.... :-)
True, and this is basically covered for the early quirky combinations.
Andre Hedrick The Linux ATA/IDE guy
PS bone-heads or not, you have to follow the rules of data-phase services; regardless, because the nature of the interface layer in the hardware appears broken. You are dealing with a child that has to be hand walked the instructions, forever. Failing to do so is the same as telling you kid to play in the interstate.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |