[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903311452590.6474@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>,
"Andreas T.Auer" <andreas.t.auer_lkml_73537@...us.ath.cx>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rees <drees76@...il.com>, Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> How about the far more regular crash case ? We may be pretty reliable but
> we are hardly indestructible especially on random boxes with funky BIOSes
> or low grade hardware builds.
The regular crash case doesn't need to care about the disk write-cache AT
ALL. The disk will finish the writes on its own long after the kernel
crashed.
That was my _point_. The write cache on the disk is generally a whole lot
safer than the OS data cache. If there's a catastrophic software failure
(outside of the disk firmware itself ;), then the OS data cache is gone.
But the disk write cache will be written back.
Of course, if you have an automatic and immediate "power-off-on-oops",
you're screwed, but if so, you have bigger problems anyway. You need to
wait at _least_ a second or two before you power off.
Linus
--
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