Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 11:39:54 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru> Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@freebsd.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org>, freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove requirement of alignment to track from MBR scheme Message-ID: <AAB1B614-149F-49E3-9A9C-79B121E1B719@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4DDA9046.8050902@yandex.ru> References: <4DDA2F0B.2040203@yandex.ru> <6DF62987-141B-4BB3-8E8D-9966EBAC828B@bsdimp.com> <4DDA9046.8050902@yandex.ru>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On May 23, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: > >> In any event, I'd be tempted to use a #define for 4096 like >> MBR_MAX_SECTOR_SIZE. >> >> - msize = MIN(pp->mediasize / pp->sectorsize, UINT32_MAX); >> + msize = MIN(pp->mediasize / pp->sectorsize, 2 * UINT32_MAX); >> >> Why this change? I think that it is in two places. > > Currently we have limit to msize = UINT32_MAX, but partition in MBR has > start offset and size (not end offset). Theoretically it can have size > that is up to UINT32_MAX sectors, also start offset can be UINT32_MAX. > And for example, for 4T disk we can have 2 partitions with 2TB size. Are there any extant examples of this? The CW is that the maximum size for an MBR device is 2TB. Warnerhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AAB1B614-149F-49E3-9A9C-79B121E1B719>