Re: [PATCH] libxfs: Get Physical Sector Size instead of Logical Sector size

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 05:05:23PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > i.e. do we have any guarantee at all that a PBS sized IO will either
> > wholly complete or wholly fail when PBS != sector size? And if not,
> > why is this a change we should make given it appears to me to
> > violate a fundamental assumption of the filesystem design?
> 
> I had the expectation that physical block size WAS the fundamental/atomic
> IO size for the disk, and anything smaller required read/modify/write.
> So I made this suggestion (and I think hch concurred) so that we weren't
> doing log IOs which required RMW & translation.

Yes, that is how it is defined.