linux-ext4 - Re: I/O topology fixes for big physical block size

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100927231551.GA15653@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:15:52 -0400
From:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>,
	"James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com" 
	<James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: I/O topology fixes for big physical block size

On Mon, Sep 27 2010 at  6:36pm -0400,
Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com> wrote:

> >>>>> "Jens" == Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com> writes:
> Jens> Does mkfs do the right thing?
> 
> Depends on which mkfs it is. Mike has tested things and can chip in
> here...

I haven't test all mkfs.* but...

mkfs.xfs just works with 1M physical_block_size.

mkfs.ext4 won't by default but -F "fixes" that:

# mkfs.ext4 -b 4096 -F /dev/mapper/20017380023360006
mke2fs 1.41.12 (17-May-2010)
Warning: specified blocksize 4096 is less than device physical sectorsize 1048576, forced to continue
...

I'll check fdisk and parted tomorrow (I know lvm2 doesn't look at
physical_block_size).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html