From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Sep 13 04:11:11 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA13688
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA13683
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:11:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id EAA04697; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
To: Alexey Pialkin <pialkin@abel.pdmi.ras.ru>
cc: ache@nagual.ru, spblug@tsctube.spb.su, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: ATAPI patch 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 13 Sep 1996 13:17:06 +0400."
             <199609130917.NAA00968@abel.pdmi.ras.ru> 
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:08:13 -0700
Message-ID: <4695.842612893@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Ugh. Got a point. 
> Yeah - i think it is possible to stay DELAYs only in atapi_probe() - all othe
rs
> are not so neccesary.

Erm, this is engineering here, no one will hurt you for being more
precise. :-) Can you perhaps do some testing and verify this by more
scientific methods?

						Jordan