From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: jim owens <owens6336@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] Btrfs: Full direct I/O and AIO read implementation.
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:32:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100215223246.GA23617@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B79CA1A.6070705@gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 05:26:34PM -0500, jim owens wrote:
> My understanding is the current 4k drives normally operate in
> 512 byte read/write access mode unless you set them to run
> as 4k only.
>
> In 512 byte mode, they buffer internally on writes. It is probably
> just as safe as any other drive on a power hit, as in anything may
> be trash.
>
> btrfs read of 512 byte boundaries is safe because we only write
> in 4k boundaries (hopefully we can detect and align on the drive).
There are drives that still have 512 byte logical, but 4k physical
blocks, this includes all the consumer (SATA) drives. You can also
have drives with 4k physical and logical block size, this includes
many S/390 DASD devices, and also samples of enterprise SAS drives.
The logical block size is the addressing limit for the OS, so your
above scenario is correct for the 512 bye logical / 4k physical
devices, but not the 4k logical / 4k physical devices. Nevermind
other corner cases like 2k block size CD-ROM which could in theory
be used in a read-only btrfs filesystem (very unlikely, but..).
So no, you really can't go under the bdev_logical_block_size()
advertized by the device, and that may as well be over 512 bytes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-15 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-10 18:53 [PATCH V2] Btrfs: Full direct I/O and AIO read implementation jim owens
2010-02-12 19:28 ` Josef Bacik
2010-02-14 1:30 ` jim owens
2010-02-15 16:42 ` Chris Mason
2010-02-15 19:18 ` jim owens
2010-02-16 16:01 ` Chris Mason
2010-02-16 17:09 ` jim owens
2010-02-15 21:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-02-15 22:26 ` jim owens
2010-02-15 22:32 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2010-02-15 22:40 ` jim owens
2010-02-16 15:49 ` Chris Mason
2010-02-15 22:01 ` rk
2010-02-15 22:31 ` jim owens
2010-02-16 19:28 ` jim owens
2010-02-16 19:39 ` Josef Bacik
2010-03-03 18:54 ` jim owens
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=20100215223246.GA23617@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=owens6336@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox