From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932226AbVLHTjg (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 14:39:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932288AbVLHTjg (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 14:39:36 -0500 Received: from [81.2.110.250] ([81.2.110.250]:27061 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932226AbVLHTjf convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 14:39:35 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6.{14,15-rc4} harddrive cache not detected From: Alan Cox To: Sebastian =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=E4rgel?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20051208194408.77e17f64.mailing@wodkahexe.de> References: <20051208194408.77e17f64.mailing@wodkahexe.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:38:53 +0000 Message-Id: <1134070734.17102.65.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Iau, 2005-12-08 at 19:44 +0100, Sebastian Kärgel wrote: > According to the manufactor the new harddrive should have 8mb cache. > /proc/ide/ide0/hda/cache also show "0" Zero doesn't mean "no cache" in that field it means it hasnt provided the info. I wouldnt worry too much - we dont actually use the cache info for anything but pretty reporting.