Re: Flash Back -- kernel 2.1.111

[Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>]

On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 08:42:37PM -0800, Andre Hedrick wrote:

> > What really bugs me about this is that while normally you're hard to
> > communicate with, this time you have actively _lied_ about the patches on
> > IRC and in email about how they will cause IDE corruption etc due to
> > timing changes.
> 
> Before I truley reply to this statement above, would you like to recant it?
> 
> > No such timing changes existed, and whenever you were asked about what was
> > actually actively _wrong_ with the patches, you didn't reply.
> 
> Here I question the taking of a patch 12 which altered the behavior of the
> subsystem baseclock to setting up PIO timings for the executing command
> block operations.  I then looked over the patch again and saw you had not
> taken it yet.
> 
> In that private email, I clearly stated I made a mistake in reading what
> was accepted into 2.5.5.  The fact is you had not accepted it yet.
> However I expect you will take it.  Given that very few people in the
> world have most of the hardware that was effected by that change, and even
> less have the NDA documents on the rules, please accept the change.

Maybe then you'll want to point out how patch #12 can change any PIO
timings? I'm definitely curious ... that'd affect my VIA driver as well,
you know ...

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs