On Fri, Sep 16 2022 at 1:57P -0400, Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Are you certain you shouldn't at least be exposing a different > >> logical_block_size to upper layers? > >> > > To be honest, I tested my patches in QEMU with 4k Logical block size and on > > a device with 4k LBA size. > > > > I did a quick test with 512B LBA size in QEMU, and I didn't see any > > failures when I ran my normal test suite. > > > > Do you see any problem with exposing the same LBA as the underlying device? > > > > Do you see any issues here? If not, I can send the next version with the > other two changes you suggested. That's fine, I just thought there might be special considerations needed. But if yo've tested it and upper layers work as expected then obviously my concern wasn't applicable. Thanks, Mike -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
