lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: What's in libata-dev.git
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 11 2006, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>> We could perhaps do it by ATA version - 255 for ATA < 3 256 for ATA 3+,
>>> Might be sane, yep.
>>
>> Since we're doing this just for paranoia, and nobody can actually
>> produce a problem case, it's safer just to hardcode 255 for all cases,
>> than try to come up with a hueristic that won't be exercised for another
>> decade...
>
> If it's a real problem, yes I agree. If it's just hand waving, then no.
> The fact that 2.4 and 2.6 has been using 256 for ages really tells me
> that no one has been affected by this. The SUSE bugzilla certainly
> hasn't seen any entries on it either.
>
>> Most new disks are lba48 anyway. (should we use 65535 there too???)
>
> Heh, good question. Given that the limit is so high, we might as well
> just use 65535. It's not nearly as sensitive as the lba28 case.

Well, I _do_ think it's just hand waving, but OTOH I don't see much harm
in using 255. Contiguous 256-sector reads and writes have gotta be
pretty rare. But that's just a hand-waving guess too ;-)

Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-09-11 22:17    [W:0.055 / U:2.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site