From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753542Ab0CQILV (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:11:21 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.61]:35937 "EHLO elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753523Ab0CQILR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:11:17 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 551 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:11:17 EDT DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=DzcC0JhCFQg3CJ55/VJuouUUAPVMpWTC/edp5nUVwMms7dJGz/jgy5zwyCv+lNyr; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: From: "jdow" To: "Tejun Heo" , "Kevin Easton" Cc: "James Bottomley" , References: <20100317025101.GA13339@guarana.org> <4BA05004.3040405@kernel.org> Subject: Re: ATA 4 KiB sector issues. Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 01:01:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-ELNK-Trace: bb89ecdb26a8f9f24d2b10475b57112071baa9b735746dc6e2fdcdf0b4623d12b174fd24821b975c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 208.127.11.7 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Tejun Heo" Sent: Tuesday, 2010/March/16 20:44 > Hello, > > On 03/17/2010 11:51 AM, Kevin Easton wrote: >> Can't we fix the problem by defaulting to aligning partitions to >> start on an LBA that is a multiple of 64260 ? >> >> Such partitions will always be 4KiB-aligned, *and* start-of-cylinder >> aligned (assuming 255/63, as seems to be the norm). >> >> Sure, that reduces your partition granularity to almost-32-MiB, but >> that's pretty small potatoes these days (and it's only a *default*, so >> you could always override that if you really cared, and didn't need >> the compatibility). > > The only thing we can gain by that is possible compatibility w/ very > old operating systems (<=w2k, BTW, it would be great if someone can > actually test it). Plus, breaking the first cylinder assumption might > not be always safe to begin with. I personally don't think it's > something worth departing from the behavior most vendors would assume > from now on (1MiB alignment). It should be enough and safer to > provide a mechanism to choose legacy alignment if someone is trying to > put something which is older than a decade there. > > Thanks. > > -- > tejun WRT very old filesystems - it won't affect Amiga partition tables or the Amiga FFS. It already understands large block sizes natively. And that's MY definition of "old" with "very" in front of it. {^_^} Joanne Dow