lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Jul]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: FS Corruption in 2.1.109 (fwd)


On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Mark Lord wrote:
>
> It might be better to regard this as an SMP issue,
> unless you can get DMA to fail on UP.

It's been tested. Alan has numbers, and it does not happen only on UP.

Note also how he cannot even _enable_ DMA on 2.0.x.

No wonder 2.0.x doesn't corrupt things, it doesn't even try to use DMA.

So why does 2.1.x default to using DMA when 2.0.x did the sane thing and
didn't?

Maybe this is why the corruption thing hasn't been reported very much for
older kernels?

Linus

----
From: Christopher Seawood <cls@seawood.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com
Subject: Re: Corruption Stats

On Mon, 27 Jul 1998, Alan Cox wrote:

> > Under 2.0.35, I cannot set the drives' using_dma flag to 1.
> >
> > 2.1.101 UP works fine
> > 2.1.103 UP corrupts
> > .10[456789] SMP IDE-DMA corrupts
> > .109 UP IDE-DMA corrupts
> > .109 SMP works fine
>
> Which drive sees corruption ?

The corruption primarily occurs on hdc which is where I do most of my
compiling (/usr & /var). I saw a tiny bit of corruption on hdd as I
installed rh 5.1 via rpms on the drive while I was testing the corruption
on hdc.

- cls



-
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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans