Re: ATA FLUSHCACHE

From: Daniel O'Connor <doconnor_at_gsoft.com.au>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:04:58 +0930
On Tuesday 24 April 2007 21:04, Eric Anderson wrote:
> > If it is a transient error then panicing seems to be about the
> > worse response :)
>
> Doesn't a failed ATA FLUSHCACHE mean that the device could not
> complete it's writing of cached bits to stable storage within the
> timeout period? That seems to me that the flushcache should be called
> more frequently then, so less writes have to be written out.

I don't know what the exact semantics of the flush command are. Also I 
have no data on typical delays for flushes, etc..

Kind of useless really 8-)

-- 
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C

Received on Tue Apr 24 2007 - 10:35:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:09 UTC