| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:36:40 -0600 From: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca> To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, htejun@...il.com Subject: Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5 Jens Axboe wrote: > On Mon, Jan 15 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Jens Axboe wrote: >>> I'd be surprised if the device would not obey the 7 second timeout rule >>> that seems to be set in stone and not allow more dirty in-drive cache >>> than it could flush out in approximately that time. >> AFAIK Windows flush-cache timeout is 30 seconds, not 7 as with other >> commands... > > Ok, 7 seconds for FLUSH_CACHE would have been nice for us too though, as > it would pretty much guarentee lower latencies for random writes and > write back caching. The concern is the barrier code, of course. I guess > I should do some timings on potential worst case patterns some day. Alan > may have done that sometime in the past, iirc. > Note that the ATA-7 spec for FLUSH CACHE says that "This command may take longer than 30 s to complete." -- Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@...pamshaw.ca Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists