linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] Make the IDE DMA timeout modifiable

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:40:08 +0400
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
To:	Mark Lord <liml@....ca>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <ssouhlal@...ebsd.org>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Make the IDE DMA timeout modifiable

Mark Lord wrote:

>>> I've lost the original question from this thread, but the idea of the 

>>    The original question concerned specifically the DMA command 
>> timeout which is twice more than the usual one, WAIT_CMD (10 seconds).

>>> longish
>>> timeouts was that drive *may* be spun down ("standby"), and thus have 
>>> to spin
>>> up again to complete media commands.  Back then, drives were much 
>>> slower at
>>> spinning up than nowadays, and the ATA spec says to allow up to 30 
>>> seconds.

>>    Well, that doesn't explain the DMA case.

> When a drive is in standby, we don't send it anything special to wake up.
> So even DMA commands have to have a long enough timeout to allow
> for spinning up.

    Yes, but why *twice* as long as the others?

> Cheers

MBR, Sergei
-
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/