From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760851AbYG3NwA (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:52:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753450AbYG3Nvu (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:51:50 -0400 Received: from ausxipps301.us.dell.com ([143.166.148.223]:53479 "EHLO ausxipps301.us.dell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752314AbYG3Nvt (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:51:49 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: s=smtpout; d=dell.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To: User-Agent; b=cfQ+qG5e/8u1PLXOv7apD2vMGUyBwPXLK8EJ6mEbfmn/mHbXfXD4GAK4 IsXhyS4qgBaoUOZH2ACbvm3HAxK9bvADfZ1TxVsfDZW6Ckgl6EfGcmxVu gWSkkqj2Fz0XLND; Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 08:51:47 -0500 From: Matt Domsch To: "Martin K. Petersen" Cc: James Bottomley , Matthew Wilcox , Ric Wheeler , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Jim Meyering , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: tools support for non-512 byte sector sizes Message-ID: <20080730135147.GA4513@auslistsprd01.us.dell.com> References: <488F524F.6020905@redhat.com> <20080729182611.GB24924@parisc-linux.org> <1217356645.6103.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 02:48:31PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > >>>>> "James" == James Bottomley writes: > > James> The problem, which ata_ram also suffers, is that the tools we > James> most need to test are the ones for manipulating non volatile > James> characteristics (like partition tables). We'd really like the > James> disk contents to survive reboot for this ... > > Yeah, I should add that I wanted persistence too. I went through a > whole stack (well, 5-6 or so) fibre channel drives from various > vendors and attempted to low-level format them to 4KB sectors. Most > of them laughed in my face. One of them tried to comply and > irreparably confused its firmware in the process. > > Just yesterday I received a couple of prototype drives in the mail. > I'll ask the vendor whether they support 4KB and if so I'll give them > a whirl. I have access to disks with native 4KB sectors now too. Would interested parties be willing to share test plans, so we could be sure we have coverage wrt correctness: kernel internals, userspace tools like parted, fdisk, kpartx, apps using O_DIRECT)? Benchmarking winds up being an NDA activity this early in the game so I don't want the focus of any joint work to be benchmarks yet. -- Matt Domsch Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux