From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:54:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:54:30 -0400 Received: from mail.parknet.co.jp ([210.134.213.6]:55306 "EHLO mail.parknet.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:54:30 -0400 To: Jan Kara Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Block size problem References: <20020910144452.GA29827@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> From: OGAWA Hirofumi Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 02:58:51 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20020910144452.GA29827@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Message-ID: <87d6rlbuas.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jan Kara writes: > Hello, > > my friend has a following problem: He has FAT filesystem on MO disk > and computer with SCSI drive reading MO disk. The problem is that > smallest blocksize supported by the driver is larger than 512 bytes > which FAT needs. What is the right solution? AFAIK, since originally FAT driver also isn't supporting blocksize smaller than device sector size, I think he should use blocksize larger than device sector size. for example, $ mkdosfs -S 2048 /dev/xxx > Another solution I though about is creating loopback directly to > device but loopback device supports only blocksize same as > underlying device... So do you think it would be nice/useful if > loopback device supported any blocksize? Since it isn't the problem of only FAT, I think it would be useful. -- OGAWA Hirofumi