[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:0.023 / U:4.972 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site