xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced for

To: Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives?
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 13:23:42 -0600
Cc: "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAJCQCtQqseJ_75WSjqqNMmSjYW-0-L_cWBDDECRVOkiTmHLeVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1806495.BCZcrVVEOf@shtub-cm> <54AC1511.1060908@xxxxxxxxxxx> <CAJCQCtQqseJ_75WSjqqNMmSjYW-0-L_cWBDDECRVOkiTmHLeVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 1/6/15 1:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> however, some drives lie about these sizes, and then mkfs.xfs can't know.
>> Try the blockdev command above to see.
> 
> blockdev and parted seem to get this wrong for a device for which
> smartctl and hdparm get correct

I don't think they get it wrong, they are just reporting what the
drive says over that interface.

I ... don't actually know where smartctl/hdparm get the values, vs.
the values exported to blockdev.  Is the drive reporting different
values over different query interfaces?  Hrm.

mkfs.xfs uses the same interface as used by blockdev.

-Eric

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>