On Thursday 24 September 2009 20:11:18 Frans Pop wrote: > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > Regarding additional pursue of the root cause, I think that it is not > > worth the effort currently since there were no other reports about > > similar problems and libata is a better solution on most modern systems > > anyway. > > I'm surprised at this, especially if the commit Will bisected it to [1] is > the culprit. That is a change in generic ide code and could thus very well > affect other users too. > > This is a clear regression and IMHO, if it is confirmed that that commit is > the cause of the regression, it should be fixed. And if not, it could > still be worthwhile to track down which commit is the cause. If somebody would like to do it please go ahead. Unfortunately I have absolutely no time to work on IDE anymore as I have moved on other projects so unless the issue have no known solution/workaround (this one has such) I'm rather reluctant to pick it up as there is a plenty of more higher-prio kernel wide issues (including things like mm regressions) to fix. > As for the lack of other reports, that could very well simply be because: > 1) there are not that many users of IDE drivers anymore > 2) most users don't really consciously watch their disk speed or more likely: 3) the issue is highly configuration dependent and not worth the hassle given the known solution/workaround > As long as the IDE code is in mainline, I don't see why regressions should > be ignored. Adding the ide list and David to CC for other opinions. BTW Please always Cc: David first on all IDE issues as he is the main IDE slave now and the transition period is long over. -- 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
