[parted-devel] [PATCH 6/6] libparted: fix optimal IO alignment

[Phillip Susi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/19/2012 3:41 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Ok, that makes sense. Then what do you think about lowering the bar
> from 1MiB to 128KiB? Maybe even 64KiB, I suppose.  Better safe than
> sorry. Just look at how many people are still reporting problems 
> with parted 1.8, so many years later.

Wasn't the problem there just that it did not know about optimal
alignment, not that it was getting incorrect values from the kernel?
The facility was added to the kernel so that tools like parted could
be told the appropriate value to use rather than having to guess, so
I'm inclined to use it.  Why have a minimum?  If the kernel says it
knows this device should use a 48 KiB alignment, who are we to assume
that is wrong?

> I'm pretty sure those tests do actually serve some purpose. Maybe
> Brian (Cc'd) knows for sure? (Brian, this is about the use of
> PED_DEFAULT_ALIGNMENT, aka 1MiB in commit
> c749046a54d983f74f8156c0aea71b0995b9477d)

Did you forget to Cc him?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQ0je1AAoJEJrBOlT6nu75sAUH/i1pcnzzv02jF8CcXDg3FH5a
BG2xz2cHWCxRyQTg043OnXmwTXbmAMiewhg4YK9OkDnYn/2fb2Qt1EKUChX4lgi7
4MM5PYU46ObHLtf25rUCYWZ77eW5WOMyMB11dqjtxY0nAsGvXb1vwaBElVkfKH5Y
dS/4i8UnAaCXW49SqsbtxY6h9tH3eIjxQ+C7nY4ALzFkj9JVE79R+xQ7IzFUnih6
nNE6T+WySglgVvAfiS+vaetxoSGQoFOh8Z0aHwsPqmJV8EUXxo5QIN+zUMTgMyVf
EEiCcEBEiGCSm2KClzxo7p5tw6QRfocUMUDqSzeGkGF5gIp4qnfTWt67fv6WDZk=
=+NKN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----