Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 20:22:43 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r216230 - head/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs Message-ID: <AANLkTikFUGauTso3CG7nu2g2dgFKQbrLdUesiyp20cfY@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20101206184453.GA1936@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <201012061218.oB6CI3oW032770@svn.freebsd.org> <20101206184453.GA1936@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6 December 2010 19:44, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 12:18:03PM +0000, Ivan Voras wrote: >> Author: ivoras >> Date: Mon Dec =C2=A06 12:18:02 2010 >> New Revision: 216230 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/216230 >> >> Log: >> =C2=A0 Use GEOM stripesize field when calculating ashift. This will enab= le correct >> =C2=A0 alignment on drives with large sector sizes (e.g. 4 KiB) but the >> =C2=A0 implementation might need to be revisited if devices with large s= tripesizes >> =C2=A0 appear (e.g. if RAID controllers or flash drives start using the = field), >> =C2=A0 probably by introducing a physsectorsize field in GEOM providers. > > Please back this out as soon as possible! Given information such as this: http://www.solarismen.de/archives/5-Solaris-and-the-new-4K-Sector-Disks-e.g= .-WDxxEARS-Part-2.html http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.solaris.opensolaris.zfs/43986 and my last message on the subject in the thread: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.devel.geom/4376 Can you explain why is it wrong, and what can go wrong with changing ashift in this way?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikFUGauTso3CG7nu2g2dgFKQbrLdUesiyp20cfY>