On Tue, Sep 12 2006, Alan Cox wrote: > Ar Llu, 2006-09-11 am 21:51 +0200, ysgrifennodd Jens Axboe: > > Well, as I said, I don't think we ever saw a case that was demonstrably > > due to the 256 sector issue. And I really don't think it is as obscure a > > fact that people seem to think it is. > > One of the ones I've got saved here is this thread. Paul goes on to > demonstrate that changing the 255<->256 limit makes 2.0/2.2/2.4 break or > not break. I remember Paul's mails, and I'm pretty sure that the 256 sectors wasn't the issue. This is one of the only cases I remember being reported to lkml, unfortunately I cannot seem to locate the 2nd part of that thread... -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
