2009/10/29 Xavier :
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Stefan Erik Wilkens
> wrote:
>> Through experimentation, I suppose you can find a few values to work
>> with. From the quick glance I took at storage-fixup, it seems to
>> disable the feature completely. Does anybody know if it's more
>> advan
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Michael Towers wrote:
> Given the difficulty of finding the optimal solution to this problem,
> I think I agree with the earlier suggestion to just monitor the
> situation and report to the user if there is a problem - and provide a
> useful account of how to handl
Given the difficulty of finding the optimal solution to this problem,
I think I agree with the earlier suggestion to just monitor the
situation and report to the user if there is a problem - and provide a
useful account of how to handle it. I imagine it would not be too
difficult to write cron scri
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Stefan Erik Wilkens
wrote:
> Through experimentation, I suppose you can find a few values to work
> with. From the quick glance I took at storage-fixup, it seems to
> disable the feature completely. Does anybody know if it's more
> advanced than this or is this the
2009/10/29 Aaron Griffin :
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Xavier wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Michael Towers
>> wrote:
>>> When I got a new laptop I investigated this problem a little and found
>>> that with hdparm -B 254/255 the temperature went up quite
>>> significantly. Thi
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
> Anyone happen to know how often the storage-fixup rules are updated?
> My Eee drive isn't listed (mine does NOT have an SSD) so I'm not sure
> what the hdparm params should be.
>
There might be a clue from the config file itself :
http://g
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Michael Towers
> wrote:
>> When I got a new laptop I investigated this problem a little and found
>> that with hdparm -B 254/255 the temperature went up quite
>> significantly. This may be a freak and I would love
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Michael Towers wrote:
> When I got a new laptop I investigated this problem a little and found
> that with hdparm -B 254/255 the temperature went up quite
> significantly. This may be a freak and I would love to know whether
> there really is something behind it, b
When I got a new laptop I investigated this problem a little and found
that with hdparm -B 254/255 the temperature went up quite
significantly. This may be a freak and I would love to know whether
there really is something behind it, but when I used -B 200 the
temperature increase was clearly small
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Roman Kyrylych
> wrote:
>> 2009/10/19 Ng Oon-Ee :
>>> On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 02:54 +0200, Damjan Georgievski wrote:
>> Anyone else has some opinion about how to handle this?
>
> I'd like to affi
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Roman Kyrylych
wrote:
> 2009/10/19 Ng Oon-Ee :
>> On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 02:54 +0200, Damjan Georgievski wrote:
>>> >> Anyone else has some opinion about how to handle this?
>>> >
>>> > I'd like to affirm the opinions of Roman and Xavier and take some action
>>> >
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:39, Stefan Erik Wilkens
wrote:
> yes, it's a serious issue and yes the users should be aware. But should the
> system itself decide to take this action or should we simply inform and let
> the user decide. I lean towards the latter myself.
>
Absolutely inform the user. D
Hey guys, new to the list.
Concerning this load_cycle_count issue, we should recall that applying
hdparm -B 255 (254) /dev/sdx has more consequences that the user should, at
least, be made aware of.
As I'm sure you are all aware: completely disabeling the feature will cause
increased heat product
2009/10/19 Ng Oon-Ee :
> On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 02:54 +0200, Damjan Georgievski wrote:
>> >> Anyone else has some opinion about how to handle this?
>> >
>> > I'd like to affirm the opinions of Roman and Xavier and take some action on
>> > this.
Thanks for picking up this topic!
>> > Anyone object
laptop-mode by itself won't do it, but laptop-mode-tools will.
However, some users (such as I) see laptop-mode-tools as bloat because it
comes with all this other stuff for controlling other aspects of power
consumption.
On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 02:54 +0200, Damjan Georgievski wrote:
> >> Anyone else has some opinion about how to handle this?
> >
> > I'd like to affirm the opinions of Roman and Xavier and take some action on
> > this.
> >
> > Anyone object to my putting storage-fixup in [extra] at least? If no
> > obj
>> Anyone else has some opinion about how to handle this?
>
> I'd like to affirm the opinions of Roman and Xavier and take some action on
> this.
>
> Anyone object to my putting storage-fixup in [extra] at least? If no
> objections by W 9/21, I plan to go ahead with that step. If it works out, we
>
17 matches
Mail list logo
