From: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>, Milan Broz <gmazyland@gmail.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loop: set physical block size to logical block size
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:36:19 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3802744.FJbvtTQ0bG@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b3faca77b098c23827e48fc8f5b2ad973f3c23d.1504646604.git.osandov@fb.com>
On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 2:54:47 AM IST Omar Sandoval wrote:
> From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>
>
> Commit 6c6b6f28b333 ("loop: set physical block size to PAGE_SIZE")
> caused mkfs.xfs to barf on ppc64 [1]. Always using PAGE_SIZE as the
> physical block size still makes the most sense semantically, but let's
> just lie and always set it to the same value as the logical block size
> (same goes for io_min). In the future we might want to at least bump up
> io_min to PAGE_SIZE but I'm sick of these stupid changes so let's play
> it safe.
>
With this patch applied, On ppc64 I get,
# blockdev --getss /dev/loop0
512
# blockdev --getpbsz /dev/loop0
512
i.e. we are back to what was being reported before commit 6c6b6f28b333
was applied.
I also executed xfstests on xfs filesystems with 4k and 32k block sizes and
did not notice any regressions.
Tested-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
--
chandan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-06 17:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-05 21:24 [PATCH] loop: set physical block size to logical block size Omar Sandoval
2017-09-06 17:06 ` Chandan Rajendra [this message]
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=3802744.FJbvtTQ0bG@localhost.localdomain \
--to=chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=gmazyland@gmail.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=kzak@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=osandov@osandov.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