From: Andrew Clausen <clausen@gnu.org>
To: "Patrick J. LoPresti" <patl@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Andries Brouwer <Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl>,
Steffen Winterfeldt <snwint@suse.de>,
bug-parted@gnu.org, Thomas Fehr <fehr@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Restoring HDIO_GETGEO semantics (was: Re: workaround for BIOS / CHS stuff)
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 00:45:00 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040703144500.GL630@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <s5g8ye1qjg9.fsf@patl=users.sf.net>
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:15:47AM -0400, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
> Parted is primarily a component of larger systems; namely, the
> RedHat/Suse/etc. installers. Those larger systems can figure out the
> correct geometry (using whatever logic/heuristics/knowledge they have)
> and pass it to the tools which need it, of which Parted is just one.
Why should they bother? Shouldn't libparted just do it all for them?
(Shouldn't parted use EDD?)
> I am suggesting that you cater to the 99.9% case. This means
> providing some way, any way, to override Parted's notion of the
> geometry. In my opinion, you should simply gut the logic for guessing
> the geometry, because it really does not belong in Parted. But I do
> not really care as long as I have a way to bypass it.
I was under the impression that 2.6 provides a mechanism for setting the
HDIO_GETGEO thingy... so any program can tell Parted (and everything
else, for that matter) what they want the geometry to be. Perhaps
I misunderstood your email:
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0404.0/0270.html
It contains this:
echo "bios_cyl:C bios_head:H bios_sect:S" > /proc/ide/hda/settings
Isn't the kernel the right place for this kind of communication to
be happening, anyway?
> (Note that this would also provide a way for end users to fix their
> partition tables if/when they broke. Right now, the stock solution
> for disks which Parted "broke" is "sfdisk -d | sfdisk -C# -H# -S#".
> Wouldn't it be nice if people could use Parted instead?)
They can, right? Just type the above, and then do some dummy thing
in parted. (Parted doesn't have a "touch" command).
> > > 1) and 2) need a way to get a "sane" geometry from the BIOS or kernel.
> >
> > Shouldn't we just use LBA? (i.e. x/255/63)
>
> IBM Thinkpads use x/240/63. In theory, other BIOSes could use
> anything.
Do they break on x/255/63?
Cheers,
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-03 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <s5gwu1mwpus.fsf@patl=users.sf.net>
2004-07-02 16:17 ` [RFC] Restoring HDIO_GETGEO semantics (was: Re: workaround for BIOS / CHS stuff) Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-02 16:50 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-02 18:28 ` dwm
2004-07-02 21:12 ` parted maintainership Andries Brouwer
2004-07-02 17:04 ` [RFC] Restoring HDIO_GETGEO semantics (was: Re: workaround for BIOS / CHS stuff) Andries Brouwer
2004-07-02 18:12 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-02 18:45 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.60.0407022025200.28638@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
2004-07-02 19:57 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2004-07-03 0:17 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-03 0:42 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-07-03 0:56 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-03 1:57 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-03 13:59 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2004-07-05 12:14 ` Restoring HDIO_GETGEO semantics for 2.6 (was: Re: [RFC] Restoring HDIO_GETGEO semantics) Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-05 13:10 ` Steffen Winterfeldt
2004-07-05 13:12 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-05 13:13 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-07-05 14:00 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-05 19:05 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-07-05 21:08 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-05 21:52 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-07-06 0:17 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-06 1:56 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-06 18:56 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-07 1:28 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-07 11:14 ` Roman Zippel
2004-07-07 11:51 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-06 8:33 ` Steffen Winterfeldt
2004-07-05 18:09 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-05 18:58 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2004-07-03 3:00 ` [RFC] Restoring HDIO_GETGEO semantics (was: Re: workaround for BIOS / CHS stuff) Andrew Clausen
2004-07-02 23:55 ` Szakacsits Szabolcs
2004-07-03 13:56 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2004-07-03 2:54 ` Andrew Clausen
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.60.0407030843400.2415@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
2004-07-03 12:44 ` Andrew Clausen
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.60.0407031535230.6149@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
2004-07-03 15:02 ` Andrew Clausen
2004-07-03 14:42 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2004-07-03 1:35 ` Andrew Clausen
2004-07-03 12:33 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-07-03 14:15 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2004-07-03 14:45 ` Andrew Clausen [this message]
2004-07-03 15:00 ` Patrick J. LoPresti
2004-07-03 20:12 ` Andries Brouwer
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=20040703144500.GL630@gnu.org \
--to=clausen@gnu.org \
--cc=Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl \
--cc=bug-parted@gnu.org \
--cc=fehr@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patl@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=snwint@suse.de \
/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