Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 17:41:24 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Roman Kurakin <rik@inse.ru> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@mail.ru>, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> Subject: Re: absolute vs. relative offsets in disklabel Message-ID: <200608071741.24844.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <44D7AB21.8080303@inse.ru> References: <20060731203213.GA75233@hades.panopticon> <200608071509.08923.jhb@freebsd.org> <44D7AB21.8080303@inse.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 07 August 2006 17:05, Roman Kurakin wrote: > 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? No, this is specific to the BSD label class, not something GEOM does in general. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200608071741.24844.jhb>