Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266561AbUAWO30 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:29:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266562AbUAWO30 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:29:26 -0500 Received: from mail-02.iinet.net.au ([203.59.3.34]:5249 "HELO mail.iinet.net.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S266561AbUAWO3Z (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:29:25 -0500 Message-ID: <40112E29.4060800@cyberone.com.au> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 01:22:33 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030827 Debian/1.4-3 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Jones CC: Evaldo Gardenali , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: buggy raid checksumming selection? References: <40112465.8040801@gardenali.biz> <20040123141352.GA19002@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040123141352.GA19002@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 700 Lines: 21 Dave Jones wrote: >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 ? > How about removing the entire output? Is it really needed? - 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/