Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754260Ab0AKURp (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:17:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754243Ab0AKURn (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:17:43 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:38378 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754230Ab0AKURl (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:17:41 -0500 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:17:34 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Karel Zak , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, util-linux-ng@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng v2.17 (stable) Message-ID: <20100111201734.GA11674@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20100108093302.GS1969@nb.net.home> <4B47A713.9060405@zytor.com> <20100111140255.GA1416@ucw.cz> <4B4B5768.2040005@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B4B5768.2040005@zytor.com> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1769 Lines: 42 On Mon 2010-01-11 08:52:56, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 01/11/2010 06:05 AM, Pavel Machek wrote: > >On Fri 2010-01-08 13:43:47, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>On 01/08/2010 01:33 AM, Karel Zak wrote: > >>> > >>>fdisk: > >>> - the fdisk command aligns newly created partitions to minimum_io_size > >>> boundary ("minimum_io_size" is physical sector size or stripe chunk > >>> size on RAIDs). > >>> > >>> - the fdisk command supports disks with alignment_offset now. > >>> > >> > >>I think we should align, by default, much more aggressively than that -- > >>because frequently we just don't know what the real physical alignment > >>is (think of flash media, which uses large erase blocks underneath.) > > > >Flash has special mapping layer, and does not care (SD/MMC), or is a > >raw nand and can't be used as block device (smartmedia). > > > > Uhm, that's just plain wrong. > > It doesn't matter if there is a "special mapping layer" -- if you're > crossing multiple erase blocks you're still having more churn in > your flash translation layer, with more wear on the device, and > lower performance than if you didn't. Eraseblocks really should not matter. It is not as if each logical sector belongs to one eraseblock.... (OTOH, maybe the eraseblock *groups* that are basis for wear-leveling do, or maybe firmware is doing something really really strange.) Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/