Re: 2.4.23-uv3 patch set released

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> Anyway, in ide_wait_stat(), the "timeout" value is always either 
> "WAIT_DRQ" (5*HZ/100) or it is "WAIT_READY" (3*HZ/100). And look at 
> WAIT_READY a bit more: 
> 
> 	#if defined(CONFIG_APM) || defined(CONFIG_APM_MODULE)
> 	#define WAIT_READY      (5*HZ)          /* 5sec - some laptops are very slow */
> 	#else
> 	#define WAIT_READY      (3*HZ/100)      /* 30msec - should be instantaneous */
> 	#endif /* CONFIG_APM || CONFIG_APM_MODULE */
> 
> I bet that the _real_ problem is this. That "3*HZ/100" value is just too 
> damn short. It has already been increased to 5*HZ for anything that has 
> APM enabled, but anybody who doesn't use APM gets a _really_ short 
> timeout.
> 
> My suggestion: change the non-APM timeout to something much larger. Make
> it ten times bigger, rather than leaving it at a value that us so small
> that a single interrupt could make a difference..
> 
> In fact, right now a single timer interrupt on 2.4.x is the difference
> between waiting 20ms and 30ms. That's a _big_ relative difference.
> 
> Andrew - unless you disagree, I'd just be inlined to change both the DRQ
> and READY timeouts to be a bit larger. On working hardware it shouldn't
> matter, so how about just making them both be something like 100 msec (and
> leave that strange really big APM value alone).

I believe you should get rid of that CONFIG_APM. Its wrong. CONFIG_APM
no longer corresponds with "is laptop". You can have laptop with ACPI
etc.

								Pavel
-- 
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/