On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 20:46 +0100, Andries Brouwer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 02:17:33PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > Still, I wonder if implementing these delays will give IO controller > > better chances to react to our queries and will get rid of some > > failures. > > My objection is this: by doing this you create myths that may > be difficult to dispel later. I recall other situations where > there were superfluous restrictions and I had a hard time convincing > others of the fact that the tests weren't there for any good reason, > that there was no single instance of hardware on earth known to > work better with the added restrictions.
Seems like a comment along the lines of "foo hardware doesn't work right unless we delay a bit here" is the obvious solution. Then someone can easily disprove it later. Lee - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
