--DBIVS5p969aUjpLe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 08:39:51AM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 02:37:21PM +0200, Reinoud Zandijk wrote:
> I doubt it. I also don't think it'd be preferable. Changing disklabeling 
> will be a big-enough issue, let's not complicate things.

it wouldn't mean changing if the disk is 512 bytes/sector ;)

> I think you should look at how things work now. DEV_BSIZE is not limiting 
> how file systems work.

it does! The filing system now to has to make sure it is allways 
sending/requesting a multiple of 512 for the sector size bringing the 
burdon to the filingsystem.

> Our device drivers don't support read-modify-write operations now; all 
> reads and writes have to be a multiple of the underlying sector size.

scsipi's cd.c does :-S

> At this point in time, DEV_BSIZE is just a unit in which block numbers for 
> bread() and bwrite() are counted.

and this is part of the evil... for calculations have to be made 
translating them to sector numbers and back.

Regards,
Reinoud


--DBIVS5p969aUjpLe
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)

iQEVAwUBQ0q/LoKcNwBDyKpoAQJBDgf/cANwDTswnT52DvyyA/aFhrQPTlLoYYR5
7o/pxn9Imidx10Yn8RPg/luGPSoOb4O9IVEfrcpdkF3vRx6Dl/SDnsfs/yDGnGQV
Pf6FztidS0BLQStyGlykqK9w453U9IZuEGCy7/TQh2RzzoF8YEcHshg+6SDeq2uF
g+claXYfhkRAq9th9cXzx8xa55CG4rHY0FP/sLIS6TG/cPgqtaX7fnekeSecfqB6
v+/77zlmrN+TJ1DPVsMZUwECn8/kESOw9v56RvOYBBa8Sf5SjPMdf2QrzKDs85Sc
u/c9zRlSrqlRtafMRmQ41W+UTsUuRCMlVVeeyLEDgW2203sGP9I3Rw==
=uX0b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--DBIVS5p969aUjpLe--