public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@drdos.com>
To: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@drdos.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andries Brouwer <aebr@win.tue.nl>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3TB disk hassles
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 10:32:07 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <41D98197.3050404@drdos.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41D97D4C.9020403@drdos.com>

Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> Andries Brouwer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Concerning one, it is a somewhat complicated format that takes over
>>> your disk, rather inconvenient. It seems to me that one needs a good
>>> reason (like a BIOS that understands the format and is able to boot
>>> from it) to choose it.
>>>
>>
>> Not really; it's actually a very simple table.
>>
>
> It would be nice to know when this is going to make it in for my Linux 
> projects.
> I am running a 3Ware 9500 series with 3.1 TB disks.  I am able to use 
> all the
> storage at present with dsfs.  dsfs can support volumes up to 281 TB 
> at present
> but linux readir() can get into some problems when directories get 
> really large.
>
> I am not seeing problems with files that are 1.5 TB in size.  Have not 
> tried to
> create a 3TB file yet, but in theory, the VFS looks to support it.  I 
> am getting around the
> partition problem by basically ignoring the table extents (fdisk is 
> broken with these large
> partitions and wraps back to 700GB) if I have only created a single 
> partition, I just query
> the drive geometry and take the remaining space on the device and I 
> ignore the partition
> table.  It works fine.  If I detect more than one of my partitions I 
> revert back to the actual
> partition dimensions.
> For Jens edification, I am using the BIO subsystem with this and I am 
> seeing no problems
> reading and writing these huge drives, so I think Linux 2.6.9 and 
> 2.6.10 will support this
> well, and appears to.  I will be testing a combined striped array at 
> around 20TB with multiple
> controllers and FC/AL and will update if any problems are encountered.
> Other than the partition problem, the base kernel seems to support 
> these huge sizes with
> 64 bit LBA addressing very well.
>
> Jeff
>

One other item I noticed is that the compiler for X86 has some problems 
doing math for a 64 bit target
variable, so when you are using Large LBA and doing something like:

sector_t lba = part.start_lba + (block * (block_size /  sector_size));

you need to cast the variables if they are defined as 32 bit numbers 
because the compiler is too stupid
to realize you are adding the cumlative result into a 64-bit value, and 
it will wrap the offset as a 32 bit number.

i.e. 

sector_t lba = part.start_lba + (sector_t)((sector_t)block * 
((sector_t)block_size /  (sector_t)sector_size));

This works but if you leave off the type casting on any of the variables 
the number reverts to a 32 bit value
and wraps when you are calculating a 64 bit lba address. 

Jeff




  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-03 17:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-12-16 14:52 3TB disk hassles Neil Conway
2004-12-16 15:33 ` Michelle Konzack
2004-12-16 15:37 ` Mark Watts
2004-12-16 15:38   ` Hans Kristian Rosbach
2004-12-16 16:44     ` Neil Conway
2004-12-16 17:15       ` Tomas Carnecky
2004-12-16 17:38         ` Neil Conway
2004-12-16 18:05           ` Tomas Carnecky
2005-02-05  1:47             ` Neil Conway
2004-12-16 17:40         ` Tomas Carnecky
2004-12-16 15:52   ` Michelle Konzack
2004-12-16 16:03     ` Jan Engelhardt
2004-12-16 16:00       ` Alan Cox
2004-12-18  0:12         ` Andries Brouwer
2004-12-18  3:08           ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-12-18 12:15             ` Andries Brouwer
2004-12-18 23:32               ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-01-03 17:13                 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2005-01-03 17:32                   ` Jeff V. Merkey [this message]
2005-01-03 18:11                     ` linux-os
2004-12-16 17:10       ` Michelle Konzack
2004-12-16 19:52 ` Adam Heath
2004-12-16 23:28 ` Pedro Venda (SYSADM)
2005-02-05  1:51   ` Neil Conway
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-12-16 22:21 Rico Tudor
     [not found] <fa.fng0mbi.10jm21g@ifi.uio.no>
     [not found] ` <fa.ls0rpqi.104a23q@ifi.uio.no>
2005-02-05  2:58   ` Bodo Eggert
2005-02-05 11:14     ` Neil Conway
2005-02-06 10:59 Neil Conway
2005-02-06 19:01 ` Bodo Eggert
2005-02-08 23:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
     [not found] <linux.kernel.20041216145229.29167.qmail@web26502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
2005-02-10  0:06 ` Jan Lindheim

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=41D98197.3050404@drdos.com \
    --to=jmerkey@drdos.com \
    --cc=aebr@win.tue.nl \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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