Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965008AbWIKUPG (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:15:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965029AbWIKUPF (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:15:05 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:40382 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965008AbWIKUPD (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:15:03 -0400 Message-ID: <4505C3BF.8070601@garzik.org> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:14:55 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060808) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jens Axboe CC: Alan Cox , Sergei Shtylyov , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: What's in libata-dev.git References: <20060911132250.GA5178@havoc.gtf.org> <45056627.7030202@ru.mvista.com> <450566A2.1090009@garzik.org> <450568F3.3020005@ru.mvista.com> <1157986974.23085.147.camel@localhost.localdomain> <45057651.8000404@garzik.org> <1157988513.23085.159.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060911153706.GE4955@suse.de> <450585DF.1080500@garzik.org> <20060911200112.GA10409@kernel.dk> In-Reply-To: <20060911200112.GA10409@kernel.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.3 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1391 Lines: 35 Jens Axboe wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 11 2006, Alan Cox wrote: >>>> We could perhaps do it by ATA version - 255 for ATA < 3 256 for ATA 3+, >>> Might be sane, yep. >> >> Since we're doing this just for paranoia, and nobody can actually >> produce a problem case, it's safer just to hardcode 255 for all cases, >> than try to come up with a hueristic that won't be exercised for another >> decade... > > If it's a real problem, yes I agree. If it's just hand waving, then no. > The fact that 2.4 and 2.6 has been using 256 for ages really tells me > that no one has been affected by this. The SUSE bugzilla certainly > hasn't seen any entries on it either. > >> Most new disks are lba48 anyway. (should we use 65535 there too???) > > Heh, good question. Given that the limit is so high, we might as well > just use 65535. It's not nearly as sensitive as the lba28 case. Well, I _do_ think it's just hand waving, but OTOH I don't see much harm in using 255. Contiguous 256-sector reads and writes have gotta be pretty rare. But that's just a hand-waving guess too ;-) Jeff - 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/