[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Warn about taskfile?

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
> > > I had some strange fs corruption, and andi suggested that it probably
> > > is TASKFILE-related. Perhaps this is good idea?
> >
> > Idea is good.
> >
> > Did corruption go away after disabling taskfile?
> Not sure, it took week for corruption to creep in, and it might have
> been loop-related or swsusp-related. I'm not at all sure it was
> TASKFILE, but I'm turning it off for now.

I doubt it was taskfile, your /dev/hda is using UDMA so taskfile's impact
is minimal. I've checked this codepath once again today and can't
see anything which has (possibly) caused Andi's problems.

I think if it is taskfile related it might be caused by some timing issues
(races) and should be visible (less frequently) with non-taskfile code too
and this is not happening.

If you are not sure if it was taskfile why do you want to warn about it?
[ Because Andi is spreading FUD about taskfile? ;-) ]

> At least it is strange to have option that says both "experimental"
> and "it is safe to say Y". What are those "most cases"?

Using (U)DMA should be 100% safe, using single-sector PIO should
also be safe, using multi-sector PIO might be less safe...

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 13:47    [W:0.050 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site