Re: [PATCH] 2.5.17 IDE 65
Martin Dalecki (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Wed, 22 May 2002 08:53:56 +0200
Uz.ytkownik Linus Torvalds napisa?:
> On Tue, 21 May 2002, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
>>>They aren't there to be respected by the ll_rw_blk layer - if some layer
>>>above it has created a request larger than the hard sector size, THAT is
>>>the problem, and there is nothing ll_rw_blk can do (except maybe BUG() on
>>>it, but I don't think we've ever really seen those kinds of bugs).
>>Hum, I'm confused here - shouldn't that be "if some layer above it has
>>created a request SMALLER than the hard sector size"? Or better a
>>request that is not a multiple of hard sector size?
> Yes, yes, you're obviously right, and I just had a brainfart when writing
> it. It should be basically: "higher levels must make sure on their own
> that all requests are nice integer multiples of the hw sector-size", and
> ll_rw_blk should never have to care.
Please add the following to the bag:
"We never saw a filesystem with less then 512 byte sectors,
so let's assume this is our request size unit." (CP/M uses 256...)
Not that pretty at all.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/