Re: Bigggg Maxtor drives (fwd)

Jim Crilly
2002-01-10T04:31:48Z

Actually it would seem this is just Andre's, not so subtle, way of
trying to prove that his ATA133/48-bit addressing patches need included
in 2.4.

-Jim

Chris Ball wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 08:14:32PM -0700, Benjamin S Carrell wrote:
>
>>I would think that you lose that space to formatting
>>
>
> That would be irrelevant. We're looking at the kernel's summation of
> the geometry, not the filesystem's description of usable space.
>
>
>>(would it not get the size of the drive from the bios?)
>>
>
> No, the kernel tends not to rely on the BIOS for geometry. Which is
> usually very wise.
>
>
>>but I stand open for correction.
>>
>
> Same here. It's always a good idea. :-)
>
> Is this perhaps Maxtor providing their own 'non-standard'[1] definition
> of gigabyte, rather than a technical issue?
>
> - Chris.
>
> [1]: (viz. 'wrong')
>