Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:27:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:27:06 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:40710 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:25:10 -0500 Message-ID: <3C326162.8080108@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 17:24:50 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.6) Gecko/20011120 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, sv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin LaHaise CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Two hdds on one channel - why so slow? In-Reply-To: <0GPA00BK988OBK@mtaout45-01.icomcast.net> <20020101201950.A11644@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 Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 04:52:02PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>I was trying to figure out what certain peoples issue with this was, >>and the answer I got back was concern about buggy hardware (both host >>side and target side) breaking the documented model. I am personally >>in no position to evaluate the veracity of that claim; perhaps you >>could comment on how to deal with broken hardware in your model. >> > > And how can we tell if a previous implementation was buggy or if it was > actually hardware that was buggy? > There are plenty of known hardware bugs, this is probably a better base for discussion... -hpa - 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/