All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Pali Rohár" <pali.rohar@gmail.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Fabian Frederick <fabf@skynet.be>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: udf: allow implicit blocksize specification during mount
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:49:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170615134939.GR5248@pali> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170615083427.GE1764@quack2.suse.cz>

On Thursday 15 June 2017 10:34:27 Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 14-06-17 21:36:45, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 13 June 2017 14:59:55 Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Mon 12-06-17 22:40:14, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > Hi! I found that following UDF patch was included into linus tree:
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9524557/
> > > > 
> > > > It is really a good improvement to recognize UDF file system which
> > > > have block size different from disk sector size and also different
> > > > from 2048.
> > > > 
> > > > But should not detection on 4K native disks (4096/4096) try to also
> > > > use block size of 512 bytes? Because current loop is from logical
> > > > sector size to 4096.
> > > 
> > > By definition, bdev_logical_block_size() is the smallest block size a
> > > device can support. So if it is larger than 512, the device driver
> > > had explicitely declared that it cannot handle smaller blocks...
> > 
> > Ok, but it is a really problem when trying to read data from filesystem 
> > which has smaller blocks as the smallest block size of a device?
> > 
> > In the worst case filesystem driver needs to read 512 bytes, but device 
> > can send only block of 4096 bytes (as it does not support smaller 
> > block). Driver receives 4096 bytes, then it process just first 512 bytes 
> > and do not care about remaining data...
> 
> Well, as much as I agree this is possible in principle, the block layer,
> block device page cache etc. don't handle this so it would be a non-trivial
> effort to support this.

Ok, so it is not a problem in UDF driver nor hardware, just it is
limitation of kernel block layer which do not support it.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@gmail.com

      reply	other threads:[~2017-06-15 13:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-12 20:40 udf: allow implicit blocksize specification during mount Pali Rohár
2017-06-13 12:59 ` Jan Kara
2017-06-13 12:59   ` Jan Kara
2017-06-14 19:36   ` Pali Rohár
2017-06-15  8:34     ` Jan Kara
2017-06-15  8:34       ` Jan Kara
2017-06-15 13:49       ` Pali Rohár [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170615134939.GR5248@pali \
    --to=pali.rohar@gmail.com \
    --cc=fabf@skynet.be \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.