mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>,
	James Bourne <jbourne@hardrock.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.4.23-uv3 patch set released
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:10:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040103221001.GB2775@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312301130430.2065@home.osdl.org>

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?]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-01-03 22:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-12-29  7:58 James Bourne
2003-12-30 11:36 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2003-12-30 19:59   ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-30 21:46     ` no DRQ after issuing WRITE was " Marcelo Tosatti
2003-12-30 21:57       ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-30 22:21         ` Marcelo Tosatti
2003-12-30 23:18           ` Eric D. Mudama
2003-12-30 22:23         ` Rob Love
2003-12-30 22:54           ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-30 22:58             ` Rob Love
2004-01-03 11:22               ` Daniel Tram Lux
2004-01-03 18:57                 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-01-03 19:27                   ` Daniel Tram Lux
2004-01-03 22:10     ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2003-12-31  6:10   ` James Bourne

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040103221001.GB2775@elf.ucw.cz \
    --to=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=jbourne@hardrock.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®