X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0-r929098 (2010-03-30) on oss.sgi.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, J_CHICKENPOX_210,J_CHICKENPOX_43 autolearn=no version=3.4.0-r929098 Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q214X4RS076450 for ; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:33:05 -0600 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1330576383-04bdf07106362b0001-NocioJ Received: from busoni.debian.org (busoni.debian.org [140.211.15.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id VS7OpVvLgH3NRqwy (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 20:33:03 -0800 (PST) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: debbugs@busoni.debian.org X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 140.211.15.34 Received: from debbugs by busoni.debian.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S2xhP-0001XW-5Q; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:33:03 +0000 X-Loop: owner@bugs.debian.org Subject: Bug#661580: mkfs.xfs fails to detect correct sector size Reply-To: Goswin von Brederlow , 661580@bugs.debian.org X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Bug#661580: mkfs.xfs fails to detect correct sector size Resent-From: Goswin von Brederlow Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org Resent-Cc: XFS Development Team X-Loop: owner@bugs.debian.org Resent-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:33:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: X-Debian-PR-Message: followup 661580 X-Debian-PR-Package: xfsprogs X-Debian-PR-Keywords: X-Debian-PR-Source: xfsprogs Received: via spool by submit@bugs.debian.org id=B.13305761474124 (code B ref -1); Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:33:01 +0000 Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Mar 2012 04:29:07 +0000 Received: from fmmailgate06.web.de ([217.72.192.247]) by busoni.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S2xdb-000147-AQ; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:29:07 +0000 Received: from moweb001.kundenserver.de (moweb001.kundenserver.de [172.19.20.114]) by fmmailgate06.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E8BD5376E; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 05:29:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from frosties.localnet ([95.208.118.96]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb001) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MUEoU-1RtVTF1GwU-00RCEn; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 05:29:00 +0100 Received: from mrvn by frosties.localnet with local (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1S2x5A-000297-HX; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:53:32 +0100 From: Goswin von Brederlow To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , 661580@bugs.debian.org, Goswin von Brederlow , Debian Bug Tracking System , Carlos Maiolino References: <20120228074914.31280.78231.reportbug@frosties.localnet> <20120228091151.GA24717@infradead.org> <4F4E82E6.3040505@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:53:32 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4F4E82E6.3040505@sandeen.net> (Eric Sandeen's message of "Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:56:22 -0600") Message-ID: <87399tkmdf.fsf@frosties.localnet> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) XEmacs/21.4.22 (linux, no MULE) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:iG6TLCW1dj54wRmmFCOftM8KB9ZQFb0HfoW3jw7PilJ WlVzQBRBpa6mMnD+fmAsFoUD01UotdICOJQTps9nlMNRdx6m+R bw49ZgJuRJLp7RyWoNlShKIveFXhYiwoaFIr8bGodyccT5Wn1V 7aKB0ocE1epkxp04gVkc2Et2y1kIArCzWG7AThfV2SLxSxHFKO ExkgACxxWsRHtg+p2c5Lg== Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org Resent-Sender: Debian BTS X-Barracuda-Connect: busoni.debian.org[140.211.15.34] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1330576383 X-Barracuda-Encrypted: AES256-SHA X-Barracuda-URL: http://192.48.157.11:80/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=1.3 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.89931 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Eric Sandeen writes: > On 2/28/12 3:11 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> Carlos, didn't you plan to look into this issue? >> >> Goswin, how do you determin that mkfs is still doing unaligned I/O >> when forcing the large sevtor size? Once we set the sector size XFS >> can't do I/O smaller than it. > > I did think this was supposed to be working already: > > get_topology(&xi, &ft); > > if (ft.sectoralign) { > /* > * Older Linux software RAID versions want the sector size > * to match the block size to avoid switching I/O sizes. > * For the legacy libdisk case we thus set the sector size to > * match the block size. For systems using libblkid we assume > * that the kernel is recent enough to not require this and > * ft.sectoralign will never be set. > */ > sectorsize = blocksize; > } else if (!ssflag) { > /* > * Unless specified manually on the command line use the > * advertised sector size of the device. > */ > sectorsize = ft.sectorsize ? ft.sectorsize : XFS_MIN_SECTORSIZE; > } > > but it may depend on whether or not it is being built with libblkid support or not...? > > I'll try to test it when I have some time, unless Carlos beats me to it. > > -Eric I'm asuming libblkid is used, otherwise a sectorsize of 512 would make no sense. It might be that NBD advertises the geometry wrong, as in ft.sectorsize isn't set correctly. That would make that part at least a kernel bug. MfG Goswin