Not quite if it still works... or if nobody is implementing
the standard up to word, becouse for example everybody was
deriving the drivers (or let's say it clear: his TCP/IP stack)
from the same basic source code and finally the hardware adjusted
to the reality instead of the standard.
Or if the standard was in fact just an aftertought after some
"refference implementation".
And anyway it's hard to argue that code is formally tighter then
narrative. (I didn't argue whatever it's formally correct).
That's a rather trivial fact.
But anyway I think you understand those issues and it's a bit
"theoretical" in respect to the ATA stuff right now.
> Understand - I really appreciate the fact you are planning to tackle this
> its just the way it comes across on correctness or lack thereof I find a
> little alarming. Maybe I am misjudging you - if so I certainly apologise
So let's just settle on the fruitless discussions and wait and see... OK?
Peace? I was basically just alarmed by the fact that you sounded a bit
discouraging to Pavel. (BTW.> The flush part I have already just added to my
sorcebase for the parts which Pavels patch tangles... ;-)
-
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/