Am Di, den 27.01.2004 schrieb Joe Thornber um 15:31: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 04:53:11PM +0100, Christophe Saout wrote: > > I think we should add additional checks to ensure that we don't run > > into trouble with devices that have a non-512-byte sector size. > > You're correct that this is indeed needed. However your solution > makes some assumptions about how the target is going to use the > device. eg. you do the wrong thing for snapshot exception stores, or > mirror logs. How exactly are my assumptions wrong? The only thing where I think it might do the wrong thing is when the log/cow store is on a disk with a bigger hardsect size than the rest and it prevents split_io from being smaller than the hardsect size of that disk. And I'm not even sure if that is always wrong. > I think the correct solution would be to add some > utility functions to dm-table.c in order to make it easy for the > targets constructors themselves to do the checking. I had this first and then I figured out (or at least I thought I'd figured out) that this isn't needed.