From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: ATA support for 4k sector size Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 07:17:06 -0800 Message-ID: <49A6B272.2070905@zytor.com> References: <1235600698-6446-1-git-send-email-matthew@wil.cx> <49A5CBF7.9000501@zytor.com> <49A5D55A.9080402@zytor.com> <20090226124339.GA10548@nb.net.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:59683 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753377AbZBZPR1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:17:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090226124339.GA10548@nb.net.home> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Karel Zak Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" , Matthew Wilcox , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sandeen@redhat.com Karel Zak wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 03:33:46PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> virtually every partition table format contains a sector size >> dependency > > Is it true that "every partition table format"? I see in > fs/partitions/ that only ibm.c and msdos.c care about a sector size. > It seems that the others formats are based on 512 sectors only. > And do they do so correctly? Looking at the UEFI spec for one, the GPT partition table format definitely has a logical sector size dependency. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.