Quote:
Originally Posted by einzlr
That's what I understand, too, but they seem to be saying that the software was assuming much tighter tolerances than actually exist, so when it observes values outside those assumptions it concludes that something has broken when in fact it has not.
|
The fix is looser software tolerances? I wonder if that means that the fix trades a system wherein specific points cause failure for a system that allows more sloppy idling throughout a wider range of function, but no catastrophic failures.