From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] virtio_blk: check for hardsector size from host Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:13:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20080529081357.GP25504@kernel.dk> References: <200805271105.00077.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <200805291804.11550.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20080529081255.GO25504@kernel.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christian Borntraeger , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Rusty Russell Return-path: Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:8803 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751379AbYE2IN7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 04:13:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080529081255.GO25504@kernel.dk> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, May 29 2008, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, May 29 2008, Rusty Russell wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 May 2008 19:04:59 Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > Rusty, Jens, > > > > > > I need your opinion on the following patch. It seems to work, but I would > > > like to get some feedback if this patch is the right approach: > > > > Looks like the right approach to me. Don't know about the block side > > of it... > > Looks good to me, definitely an improvement for eg loop backed > storage. > > > Just that u64 seems like overkill: u32? > > Definitely, u32 would be just fine, u64 is way overkill :-) Even u16 would work, the block layer doesn't use more than an unsigned short for storing hardware sector size anyway. -- Jens Axboe