Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266559AbUAWOPc (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:15:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266560AbUAWOPc (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:15:32 -0500 Received: from delerium.codemonkey.org.uk ([81.187.208.145]:24233 "EHLO delerium.codemonkey.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266559AbUAWOPc (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:15:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:13:53 +0000 From: Dave Jones To: Evaldo Gardenali Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: buggy raid checksumming selection? Message-ID: <20040123141352.GA19002@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Evaldo Gardenali , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <40112465.8040801@gardenali.biz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40112465.8040801@gardenali.biz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 616 Lines: 16 On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 11:40:53AM -0200, Evaldo Gardenali wrote: > Uhh. correct me if I am wrong, but shouldnt it select the fastest algorithm? No, if it can choose a function which avoids polluting the cache over one that doesn't, it will. Even if that means slightly less raw throughput This comes up time after time, maybe we need a printk in that case ? Dave - 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/