From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
Ibragimov Rinat <ibragimovrinat@mail.ru>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC]ext4 on 4k-sector drives without read-modify-write support
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:09:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110228180925.GA28617@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yq1sjv8p5n4.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:58:55AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> writes:
>
> >> I have a proposal about 4k-sector hard drives support in fs drivers.
> >> Toshiba MK1231GAL is an 1.8" LIF IDE drive. It has 4096-byte physical
> >> and 512-byte logical sectors [1]. Unlike others drives with Advanced
> >> Format, it has not read-modify-write logic, so it can only operate
> >> with 4k blocks. Fortunately some filesystems in linux (I tested jfs,
>
> Jeff> Then it should report a logical block size of 4k. You have a
> Jeff> drive with broken firmware.
>
> Several vendors are contemplating something similar.
>
> I.e. keep the 512-byte addressing to avoid implementing support for 4KB
> logical blocks in the OS ATA stack. But the drive will reject I/Os that
> are not naturally aligned multiples of 4KB.
It's fine for them to do this; but if they do, they should be
reporting a logical block size of 4k, yes? That's the definition of
what logical block size means....
Ibragimov, the problem with your patch is that it means that users who
had previously created a 1k block file system on an advanced format
disk with 4k physical sectors but 512 byte logical sectors would no
longer be able to mount that file system. Yes, it was stupid for them
to do so, and they are deserving of plenty of mocking. But
technically, it is something that should work, even if it's not
advisable from a performance point of view.
Maybe we can create a blacklist of broken drives that report a logical
blocksize of 512 but which really have a logical block size of 4k?
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-28 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-26 18:24 [PATCH][RFC]ext4 on 4k-sector drives without read-modify-write support Ibragimov Rinat
2011-02-28 14:52 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-02-28 14:58 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-02-28 18:09 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2011-02-28 20:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-02-28 21:05 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-02-28 21:10 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-02-28 21:22 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-02-28 21:57 ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-01 15:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-02-28 21:20 ` James Bottomley
2011-02-28 21:24 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-02-28 21:23 ` Martin K. Petersen
2011-02-28 22:52 ` [PATCH][RFC]ext4 on 4k-sector drives without read-modify-writesupport Ibragimov Rinat
2011-03-01 22:16 ` Ibragimov Rinat
2011-03-10 17:01 ` Ibragimov Rinat
2011-02-28 17:54 ` [PATCH][RFC]ext4 on 4k-sector drives without read-modify-write support Ibragimov Rinat
2012-09-27 11:41 ` Mike
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=20110228180925.GA28617@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=ibragimovrinat@mail.ru \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).