From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pAU0Jx5m119186 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:20:00 -0600 Received: from ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 1944C19EFDBA for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 16:19:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.143]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id xC8H0o4zhENgBeOL for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 16:19:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:19:27 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxfs: Get Physical Sector Size instead of Logical Sector size Message-ID: <20111130001927.GU7046@dastard> References: <1322162451-17036-1-git-send-email-cmaiolino@redhat.com> <20111124195042.GA3671@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> <20111127010643.GU2386@dastard> <4ED2C233.8010104@sandeen.net> <20111127235051.GX2386@dastard> <4ED3B2BC.1060609@sandeen.net> <4ED51899.7000706@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ED51899.7000706@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Carlos Maiolino , "Martin K. Petersen" , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:38:33AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 11/29/11 11:15 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > >>>>>> "Eric" == Eric Sandeen writes: > > > > Eric> It seems that we should be checking for any alignment offsets in > > Eric> libxfs then, too; if there IS an offset, then perhaps 4k is the > > Eric> wrong answer, (perhaps there is no right answer) but if there is > > Eric> NO offset, 4k should be the right choice, yes? > > > > In most cases the partitioning/DM tools should give you a 0 offset. But > > it would a good idea to at least print a warning if lbs != pbs and > > offset > 0. > > Right, Dave's concern was for when the partitioning tools didn't do the > job, we don't want to break fs consistency guarantees... > > Dave, does checking for an offset before choosing 4k sectors seem > sufficient to you? Yes, especially if combined with Christoph's comments about ensure the "-f" flag is needed to make a filesystem on an unaligned config. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs