From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 16:00:57 -0400 From: Mike Snitzer Message-ID: <20110314200057.GB18904@redhat.com> References: <4D7E4689.9060300@cox.net> <20110314171726.GA18249@redhat.com> <4D7E68F6.5040700@cox.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D7E68F6.5040700@cox.net> Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Advanced Format disks mixed with regular disks? Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: LVM general discussion and development Cc: Karel Zak On Mon, Mar 14 2011 at 3:13pm -0400, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 03/14/2011 12:17 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 14 2011 at 12:47pm -0400, > >Ron Johnson wrote: > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>Is there any concern with mixing 4KB-sector drives with 512-byte > >>sector drives in the same LV? > > > >Both LVM2 and Device Mapper have been updated to accommodate stacking > >such a mix of drives. > > > >See this for a bit more detail: > >http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/docs/io-limits.txt > > > >Particularly, the "Stacking I/O Limits" section. > > > >The concern raised for partial (4k) writes to the 512b drive was > >discussed a bit more here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/22/295 > > > > Does this mean that util-linux v2.17.1 fdisk correctly handle AF > disks? (Note that I will *not* be booting off an AF device.) > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/util-linux/v2.17/v2.17.1-ReleaseNotes > > fdisk: > - cleanup alignment, default to 1MiB offset [Karel Zak] > - don't check alignment_offset against geometry [Karel Zak] > - fallback for topology values [Karel Zak] > - fix ALIGN_UP [Karel Zak] > - fix check_alignment() [Karel Zak] > - fix default first sector [Karel Zak] > - use "optimal I/O size" in warnings [Karel Zak] > - use 1MiB offset and grain always when possible [Karel Zak] > - use more elegant way to count and check alignment [Karel Zak] > - use optimal_io_size [Karel Zak] Given that changelog, yes. (cc'ing kzak for the authoritative answer ;)