|| ||"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen-AT-oracle.com> |
|| ||Tejun Heo <tj-AT-kernel.org> |
|| ||Re: ATA 4 KiB sector issues. |
|| ||Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:18:27 -0500|
|| ||"linux-ide-AT-vger.kernel.org" <linux-ide-AT-vger.kernel.org>,
Daniel Taylor <Daniel.Taylor-AT-wdc.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff-AT-garzik.org>, Mark Lord <kernel-AT-teksavvy.com>,
tytso-AT-mit.edu, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-zytor.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan-AT-lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, irtiger-AT-gmail.com,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew-AT-wil.cx>, aschnell-AT-suse.de,
knikanth-AT-suse.de, jdelvare-AT-suse.de, Karel Zak <kzak-AT-redhat.com>,
Jim Meyering <jim-AT-meyering.net>|
|| ||Article, Thread
>>>>> "Tejun" == Tejun Heo <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Tejun> The [Windows Vista/7] partitioner seems to be using 1M as the
Tejun> basic alignment unit and offsetting from there if explicitly
Tejun> requested by the drive
Tejun> Please note that hdparm is misreporting the alignment offset. It
Tejun> should be reporting 512 instead of 256 for offset-by-one drives.
Already fixed. Your hdparm must be old.
Tejun> Partitioners maybe should only align partitions which will be
Tejun> used by Linux and default to the traditional layout for others
Tejun> while allowing explicit override.
I don't think we take the partition type into account. Karel?
Tejun> Reportedly, commonly used partitioners aren't ready to handle
Tejun> drives larger than 2 TiB in any configuration and alignment isn't
Tejun> done properly for drives with 4 KiB physical sectors. 4 KiB
Tejun> logical sector support is broken in both the kernel
Huh, what? My homedir is on a 4KiB LBS/PBS drive and has been for ~2
Tejun> (need more details and probably a whole section on partitioner
I'm Cc:'ing Karel Zak and Jim Meyering who have been doing all the
alignment work for fdisk and parted respectively. Karel, Jim: The full
writeup is here:
It'd be great if you guys could share what you have been doing to the
Tejun> Unfortunately, the transition to 4 KiB sector size, physical only
Tejun> or logical too, is looking fairly ugly. Hopefully, a reasonable
Tejun> solution can be reached in not too distant future but even with
Tejun> all the software side updated, it looks like it's gonna cause
Tejun> significant amount of confusion and frustration.
With regards to XP compatibility I don't think we should go too much out
of our way to accommodate it. XP has been disowned by its master and I
think virtualization will take care of the rest.
FWIW, recent fdisk has a command line flag that will enable/disable DOS
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
to post comments)