From owner-cvs-all Tue May 5 12:25:30 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19497 for cvs-all-outgoing; Tue, 5 May 1998 12:25:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA19402; Tue, 5 May 1998 12:24:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA18789; Tue, 5 May 1998 12:17:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd018772; Tue May 5 19:17:11 1998 Message-ID: <354F65AA.41C67EA6@whistle.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 12:16:58 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Organization: Whistle Communications X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.5-RELEASE i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Poul-Henning Kamp CC: Bruce Evans , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-sys@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern vfs_cluster.c References: <2008.894388790@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > It should really be a mount-option, shouldn't it ? well, maybe more than that. Is it really a question of whether the underlying device can handle a larger IO? I'm not sure what the author of those bits had in mind when they added them. I'm thinking of adding the capacity in the SLICE code for larger IO requests to be broken up transparently (ala physio()) (or possibly similar to ccd, (I'm not sure yet) or for a "report your capabilities" method which would report.. slice size block size optimum IO size minimum IO size Maximum IO size ? CLUSTER capabilities (as per this discussion)? maybe both. now that soft updates is slowing down I may have some time for such niceties again. > > Poul-Henning > > In message , Juli > an Elischer writes: > >Talking of clusterring.. > > > >One problem with clustering is the fact that the flag that dissallows > >CLUSTERING is stored in the BDEVSW entry. > > > >from sys/conf.h: > >#define D_NOCLUSTERR 0x10000 /* disables cluter read */ > >#define D_NOCLUSTERW 0x20000 /* disables cluster write */ > >#define D_NOCLUSTERRW (D_NOCLUSTERR | D_NOCLUSTERW) > > > > which is patently the wrong place for it. for several reasons: > > > >1/ different SCSI devices may have different ideas about clustering.. > >2/ in DEVFS/SLICE, all disks come in through the same major number/devfs[] > >entry no matter which driver they eventually get passed to. > >3/ [bc]devsw entries will totally go away anyhow. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member > phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." > "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message