Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:02:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:02:32 -0500 Received: from 81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk ([81.2.122.30]:517 "EHLO 81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:02:31 -0500 From: John Bradford Message-Id: <200303121614.h2CGEJA5001090@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> Subject: Re: bio too big device To: axboe@suse.de (Jens Axboe) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:14:19 +0000 (GMT) Cc: aebr@win.tue.nl, andre@linux-ide.org, scott-kernel@thomasons.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20030312155105.GJ834@suse.de> from "Jens Axboe" at Mar 12, 2003 04:51:05 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 940 Lines: 21 > > I am not quite sure I understand your reasoning. > > We have seen *zero* drives that do not understand 256 sector commands. > > Maybe such drives exist, but so far there is zero evidence. > > Have you read the thread? You are obviously mistaken. I've read most of it, and as far as I can see the problem is that one drive is known to accept 256 sector commands and occasionally fail on them. Since that is obviously broken behavior, I don't see how it can possibly even be suggested that we reduce the performance of possibly every other hard disk in use[1] just to compensate for it. [1] Note that the known broken disk is 700 MB one, so there probably aren't many in use anyway. John. - 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/