From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: Large disk drives Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:30:45 -0800 Message-ID: <20141105193045.GA13265@infradead.org> References: <1415203668.13212.2.camel@jarvis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:42619 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751081AbaKETau (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:30:50 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: James Bottomley , "Dale R. Worley" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 11:34:11AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > Sorry, meant to. In principle I'm OK with this as the lever for the > > hack (largely because it means we don't need to do anything) but will > > the distributions support it? > > While I can't speak for the distributions, it's reasonable to assume > that if something becomes part of the upstream kernel then they will > include it. Btw, we do have precedence for looking at partition tables from SCSI code with scsi_partsize(), so the layering violation of looking at EFI labels for disks sizes wouldn't be something entirely new even if we did it in kernel space.