From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.lichtvoll.de (mondschein.lichtvoll.de [194.150.191.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l2FD7a6p019729 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:07:38 -0700 Received: from localhost (dslb-084-056-091-239.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.56.91.239]) by mail.lichtvoll.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC7095ADEC for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:07:35 +0100 (CET) From: Martin Steigerwald Subject: Re: cache+barriers vs cache+nobarriers vs disabled cache+barriers vs disabled cache+nobarriers Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:07:34 +0100 References: <20070315092220.1B09B193FE@mail.edu.haifa.ac.il> <200703151339.36259.Martin@lichtvoll.de> In-Reply-To: <200703151339.36259.Martin@lichtvoll.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703151407.34419.Martin@lichtvoll.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Am Donnerstag 15 März 2007 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > But why do you want to disable write cache in the first case? As long > as you are using 2.6.17.7 or later you can safely enable barriers and > and write cache. Hello again, Leon, of couse using write barriers is only possible if the hardware requirements (cache flushes or similar mechanisms) are met. XFS complains if it can't use barriers. See dmesg or log for details. It seems that the mailinglist software broke my GPG signature. It was correct as I sent out the mail. Regards, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7