Re: optimal io size / custom alignment

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 10:52:04PM +0800, Tom Yan wrote:
> As I have mentioned in previous mails, I have an sata/usb3 adapter
> which could work in uas mode, and when it does, it has a weird optimal
> i/o size:
> 
> Disk /dev/sdb: 74.5 GiB, 80026361856 bytes, 156301488 sectors
> Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
> I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 33553920 bytes

This is no problem (33553920 % 512 = 0) with the current kernel and
the current util-linux git tree where we support non power of 2
alignment.

> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-newbie-8/how-to-foramt-2tb-external-hard-drive-4175529792/
> 
> In the above link, there shows another similar case of an external
> drive with 4k physical sector.

from the link:

    Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
    I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 33553920 bytes

this is problem (33553920 % 4096 != 0) and frankly it seems like
pretty strange thing, maybe kernel guys can comment it (CC: to
Martin).

> I am not sure if there's anything wrong with the device(s) or the
> kernel, but anyway I doubt if fdisk should determine alignment with
> this size. As you can calculate, it may not necessarily be a multiple
> of the size of physical sectors, or that of common erase block of SSDs
> (which is not reported anywhere AFAIK).
> 
> Perhaps this I/O size does matter on alignment for certain cases, but
> shouldn't physical sector or erase block be at least of higher
> priority when it comes to alignment?

I think we can test "optimal_io_size % physical_sector_size" and use physical
sector size as the granularity if the optimal_io_size is a strange number.

> In any case, it would be nice if fdisk can allow customize alignment
> (like gdisk does), so that users can at least decide how partitions
> should be aligned in weird cases like this. With that, the long-time
> deprecated "dos compatibility" might be able to go as well.

I'll think about it...

    Karel


-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux