Hi!

quoted text
> >   - some disk makers have sort of agreed not to do that, and
> >       expect forever to hide the larger underlying sector size
> >       behind a virtual 512 (of course, this imposes alignment
> >       restrictions, but that's a smaller problem)
> 
> yes, this is happening also.
> 
> There will be 3 types of disks eventually:
> 1) those that report a 512-byte sector size, and are really a 512-byte
>    size.  This is nearly all disks today.
> 
> 2) those that report a 512-byte sector size, but are really a
>    4096-byte size, and the drive does the conversions and
>    read/modify/write.  T10 and T13 are looking to add commands to
>    expose this different underlying physical sector size so the OS
>    could be aware of it.  This is primarily being driven to mitigate
>    any problems that may happen with "legacy" OSs that are not aware
>    of the difference.

How is this going to work with journaling? This has nasty property
that if you are writing to sector n during powerfail, disk may also
kill sectors n-3, n-2 and n-1..... and that's bad right?

							Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/