From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:16:19 +1100

On 18/03/07, Timo Horstschäfer <mail_at_timo-horstschaefer.de> wrote:
> Jonas Hellesøe Nielsen wrote:
> > But is such a buffer hard to implement in the plugin API? I think it would
> > be cool to implement it as a seperate function, with a name which indicated
> > that it _didn't_ locked.
> I suggest adding an additional buffer to ata_write_sectors as it wouldn't
> change the API and is independent from plugins.
>
> --
> Timo Horstschäfer
>
>
The buffer wouldnt be hard to implement, but pointless... The way its
done now it means that not extra buffer is needed, and we can do more
than just a simple write to a sector/file/whatever when needed.. With
a buffer, only 1 (or a few) writes could be queued and there would be
a articifial limit on the amount of data that could be dumped
Received on 2007-03-18