Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 08:01:41 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Cc: julian@whistle.com, bde@zeta.org.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DEVFS: new sample code Message-ID: <199712150801.BAA29005@usr09.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <19971214104251.63209@lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Dec 14, 97 10:42:51 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > It ain't going to get done there it's getting done in a layer just below, > > and in conjunction with, the disk label layer. The disklabel layer notices > > the bad144 flag and sticks the bad144 'wedge' below itself. the bad144 has > > no business being lower than that because it doesn't cover other slices. > > They may have their own badblock handlers. > > I don't understand why slices should have any notion of bad blocks. > The way I see it, a slice is a virtual disk, and virtual disks are > immaculate. Bad blocks are a fact of life of the dirty > representations of our idealized disks. A slice is a linear array of sectors. A bad block SLICE layer is a layer which represents an imperfect linear array of sectors as a smaller, but perfect, linear array of sectors. For BSD disklabels, this "media perfection layer" should live at the same level as a "CCD agregation layer". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712150801.BAA29005>