[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: v2.6 vs v3.0
On Sun, Sep 29 2002, Trever L. Adams wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-09-29 at 11:45, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > How many accounts of the new block layer corrupting data have you been
> > aware of? Since 2.5.1-preX when bio was introduced, I know of one such
> > bug: floppy, due to the partial completion changes. Hardly critical.
> >
> > --
> > Jens Axboe
> Sorry Jens, I never meant to imply I had heard of any since that floppy
> bug. I just understand there were some problems at the beginning.
> Also, I haven't been able to follow LKM as well as I would have liked
> lately, but a few months ago, in one of the many IDE bash sessions that
> have happened in 2.5.x I read a few people blaiming some of the problems
> on interactions between the new block layer and the IDE layer.

No worries. I can understand how people would be weary of block layer
changes, as they have the potential to corrupt your data.

> Sorry about the worries. I am just trying to be cautious. I am
> guessing you are saying that the block layer is now solid? If this is

Nah I'm saying that it's always been solid. Why would I suddenly
destabilize it now? :-)

> the case, it sure knocks a few of my worries out of the ball park and I
> will be that much closer to trying out 2.5.x myself.

As always, it's untested territory so a backup may be in order. But I
don't view testing 2.5 as any more dangerous as testing 2.4-ac.

Jens Axboe

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.408 / U:5.840 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site