Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:13:57 +0400 From: Roman Kurakin <rik@inse.ru> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: absolute vs. relative offsets in disklabel Message-ID: <44D7AD15.90107@inse.ru> In-Reply-To: <200608071509.08923.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20060731203213.GA75233@hades.panopticon> <864pwtoorp.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060806145954.GC907@hades.panopticon> <200608071509.08923.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin: >On Sunday 06 August 2006 10:59, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: > > >>* Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav (des@des.no) wrote: >> >> >>>>Recent `disklabel differences FreeBSD, DragonFly' thread gave me a >>>>thought - why do we have absolute offsets in disklabel? >>>> >>>> >>>We don't, AFAIK. Since the transition to GEOM, the offsets are >>>relative to the start of the containing provider. >>> >>> >>It has nothing to do with GEOM, it's ondisk format of disklabel. I've >>confirmed, there are global offsets. >> >> > >Actually, the GEOM provider goes though some gymnastics to portray the offsets >as relative to userland, but ondisk they are still stored as absolute to >preserve compatiblity. > > You mean that "read mbroffset" to geom could return a relative value? rik
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44D7AD15.90107>