On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 03:00:42PM +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 03:17:23PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
> > > Is there an error case that this patch fixes? I've had page alignment checks
> > > in my PRD direct_access code forever, and I don't know if they've ever
> > > tripped.
> > >
> >
> > Yes! as I said above fix fdisk. You never tripped on it because partitions never
> > worked and you never tried them. With current code fdisk is very trigger happy
>
> What do you mean with fdisk? which version?
Oh, I read all your email more carefully now, and if I good understand
the problem is what I/O limits the device provides to userspace rather
than with fdisk.
Anyway, I think you're right that alignment_offset is not the right
thing. It was introduced for backward compatibility with DOS-like
partitioning tools (~magical sector 63). I have doubts it's usable for
something else. For normal use-case should be enough to set proper
phy-sector size or min/optimal I/O limits (e.g. zram has all the
limits set to 4K(PAGE_SIZE)).
$ lsblk --topology /dev/zram0
NAME ALIGNMENT MIN-IO OPT-IO PHY-SEC LOG-SEC ROTA SCHED RQ-SIZE RA WSAME
zram0 0 4096 4096 4096 4096 0 128 128 0B
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
