Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2/28/12 3:11 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Carlos, didn't you plan to look into this issue?
>>
>> Goswin, how do you determin that mkfs is still doing unaligned I/O
>> when forcing the large sevtor size? Once we set the sector size XFS
>> can't do I/O smaller than it.
>
> I did think this was supposed to be working already:
>
> get_topology(&xi, &ft);
>
> if (ft.sectoralign) {
> /*
> * Older Linux software RAID versions want the sector size
> * to match the block size to avoid switching I/O sizes.
> * For the legacy libdisk case we thus set the sector size to
> * match the block size. For systems using libblkid we assume
> * that the kernel is recent enough to not require this and
> * ft.sectoralign will never be set.
> */
> sectorsize = blocksize;
> } else if (!ssflag) {
> /*
> * Unless specified manually on the command line use the
> * advertised sector size of the device.
> */
> sectorsize = ft.sectorsize ? ft.sectorsize : XFS_MIN_SECTORSIZE;
> }
>
> but it may depend on whether or not it is being built with libblkid support or not...?
>
> I'll try to test it when I have some time, unless Carlos beats me to it.
>
> -Eric
I'm asuming libblkid is used, otherwise a sectorsize of 512 would make
no sense.
It might be that NBD advertises the geometry wrong, as in ft.sectorsize
isn't set correctly. That would make that part at least a kernel bug.
MfG
Goswin
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
