From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 25 15:12:33 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC917106564A for ; Wed, 25 May 2011 15:12:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 233FD8FC14 for ; Wed, 25 May 2011 15:12:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from odyssey.starpoint.kiev.ua (alpha-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.101]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id SAA29987; Wed, 25 May 2011 18:12:22 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4DDD1C56.70706@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 18:12:22 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110504 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcel Moolenaar References: <4DDA2F0B.2040203@yandex.ru> <9ED563AB-7B35-40F4-A33E-015317858401@bsdimp.com> <4DDB5375.6050004@FreeBSD.org> <2FCA1E3C-E11C-46C9-A41B-E5DF4D8BA1FC@bsdimp.com> <9B250685-62F2-4AF7-BDCC-D176FA3C6FCD@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <9B250685-62F2-4AF7-BDCC-D176FA3C6FCD@mac.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Andrey V. Elsukov" , Warner Losh , freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove requirement of alignment to track from MBR scheme X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 15:12:33 -0000 on 24/05/2011 21:12 Marcel Moolenaar said the following: > With respect to the creation: > > Since out synthesized geometry is not necessarily the same > as other OSes, we could opt to synthesize a geometry that > has a track size (= sectors/track) that is a multiple of 8 > (to play nice with 4K sectors), and/or take the stripe > size of the underlying GEOM into account. This fundamentally > doesn't change a thing for MBR, but has the side effect of > achieving some of the goals *and* automatically works for > EBR as well. > > Thus: rather than hack MBR and forgetting about EBR and other > schemes, maybe we only have to tweak the geometry synthesis > to give people what they want without going over board. I don't think that currently we do synthesize any geometry in kernel. I think that we just whatever BIOS/firmware/etc provides to us in some way. > After > 9.0 branched, we can do a lot more knowing we have plenty > of soak time... I agree in general, but there is one thing I want now/ASAP - ability to use gpart to create (valid) partitions the way I like it disregarding whatever fake geometry there might be. I hate when tools go EDAVE on me. -- Andriy Gapon