[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost (Izumi Tsutsui) writes:
>The design of FFS is independent from design of our buffercache(9)
>or all disk drivers, so if FFS has its own "disk block size" value
>in its superblock, we have to check and convert (or reject)
>the "FFS disk block size value" for our native I/O size
>whichever we will choose DEV_BSIZE or physical block size.
>(fragment size -> FFS disk block size -> our I/O size)
Ignoring the fsbtodb translation from the superblock is probably
the way to go.
>Note lfs and ext2fs have the same issue.
lfs is obvious (same code as ufs). I haven't looked at ext2fs.
>FYI, Windows XP creates MBR in the first sector even on a removable
>2KB/sec MO disk and it seems to use physical block numbers.
I haven't found an official spec for MBR on non-512byte blocks, but
so far everyone seems to use the first 512 bytes from LBA 0.
>(though our fdisk(8) and mbrlabel(8) don't work on !512bytes/sec disks)
Yes, pretty much hardcoded.
>BPB also uses physical block numbers.
The msdosfs code should handle all block sizes (also on GPT volumes now).
Michael van Elst
"A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
Main Index |
Thread Index |