Re: ide.2.4.1-p3.01112001.patch

[Vojtech Pavlik]

On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 04:52:00PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, John Heil wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > 
> > > Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 00:25:28 +0000 (GMT)
> > > From: Alan Cox <[e-mail]>
> > > To: Linus Torvalds <[e-mail]>
> > > Cc: Vojtech Pavlik <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> > > Subject: Re: ide.2.4.1-p3.01112001.patch
> > > 
> > > > what the bug is, and whether there is some other work-around, and whether
> > > > it is 100% certain that it is just those two controllers (maybe the other
> > > > ones are buggy too, but the 2.2.x tests basically cured their symptoms too
> > > > and peopl ehaven't reported them because they are "fixed").
> > > 
> > > I've not seen reports on the later chips. If they had been buggy and then 
> > > fixed I'd have expected much unhappy ranting before the change
> > 
> > The "fix" was an hdparm command like hdparm -X66 -m16c1d1 /dev/hda.
> > Which I set for my VIA 686a on a Tyan mobo w a 1G Athlon.
> 
> Careful. It may be that your fix just avoids the corruption because the
> other changes make it ok - like the 16-sector multi-count thing maybe
> hides a problem that might still exist - it just changes the "normal"
> timing so that you won't ever see it in practice any more.
> 
> These kinds of magic interactions is why I'm not at all happy about driver
> changes until people really know what it was that caused it, and _know_
> that it's gone.
> 
> Anyway, for you the problem apparently happened even on a 686a, but just
> the 586 series. Correct?

Yes, but this is a different problem. No corruption was happening here.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs