http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/304791/b4651360c812df4a/?format=printable
Posted Oct 29, 2008 14:29 UTC (Wed) by davem (subscriber, #4154) [Link] Btw, if you care at all about your data, you will not run Ubuntu's release that doesn't fix the kernel and instead turns timestamps off. If you turn timestamps off, at rates of 1GB/s and above you are exposed to possible sequence number wraparound. This in turn can lead to data corruption. Without timestamps there is no PAWS protection (Protection Against Wrapped Sequence numbers) and thus at high enough data rates new data can be interpreted as old data and vice versa, corrupting your data stream. Ubuntu made the wrong decision, there is simply no argument for the way this was "handled." I don't understand why everyone gets their tits in a knot when even the slightest suggestion of slipping a release is suggested in order to fix a serious bug like one of this magnitude. It is always the right thing to do, and it avoids crap like what is happening here. To reiterate, if timestamps are off, you are exposed to possible data corruption. -- unable to visit some websites and ftpsites with 2.6.27 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/264019 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
