Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 02:15:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 02:15:34 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:57563 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 02:15:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:20:13 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Dave Olien Cc: Daniel Phillips , Samium Gromoff <_deepfire@mail.ru>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.5] DAC960 Message-ID: <20020920062013.GD3990@suse.de> References: <20020915131920.GR935@suse.de> <20020916131359.A17880@acpi.pdx.osdl.net> <20020919142505.B27767@acpi.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020919142505.B27767@acpi.pdx.osdl.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1060 Lines: 27 On Thu, Sep 19 2002, Dave Olien wrote: > > Daniel > > Here's my latest progress on my changes to the DAC960 driver. > > I spent Tuesday banging my head trying to figure out why data blocks > written to disk to SOMETIMES were read back with DIFFERENT data. > On wednesday, I changed from using Linux 2.5.34 to using Linux 2.5.36. > My bad data problem went away with that change. There must have been > an important change in the 2.5.36 BIO code. Neither 2.5.35 nor 2.5.36 has any critical bio fixes, so I would look into this a bit more if I were you. Only if you were using bio_kmap_irq() would there be something to look for, but DAC960 is not. That was 2.5.35. 2.5.36 just starts sizing bio_vec pools based on free memory, no bug fixes. Likewise in the block layer, I'm not seeing anything. -- Jens Axboe - 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/