"Kevin P. Fleming" <kevin@labsysgrp.com> wrote:
> OK, I see that now... and it looks like the risks associated with
> setting the unmaskirq flags on my drives (none of the four drives have
> it set now) are too great to be worth playing with it. I'll just not
> use my PPP connection during these particularly heavy disk activity
> moments. Thanks for the quick response.
I don't think that the unmask irq thing is really a problem for any modern
system. Since the days of 1.2 I've run every system with -u 1. It's not
a case of: '-u 1' gives a .01% chance of corruption on any system, instead
it's a case of '-u 1' gives a 100% chance of corruption on certain
systems, see the difference?
In short, try the -u 1 cautiously (maybe on a r/o fs, or have backups) if
you're paranoid, but if your system is modern, have no fears.
DISCLAIMER: *if* your system does eat itself, it wasn't me that told you
it wouldn't.
David
-- David Mansfield (718) 963-2020 david@ultramaster.com Ultramaster Group, LLC www.ultramaster.com- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 21:00:34 EST