[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: sector size of 2068?
    In message <>, 
    d B. Johnson" writes:
    | On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Peter wrote:
    | > What would need to be changed to make a SCSI disk with sector_size
    | > reporting back as 2068 work?
    | In the SCSI controller BIOS setup, low-level format the drive using
    | your new controller. The drive was apparently low-level formatted on

    We've been through that already. His question is, why can't we use it with
    2068? (The reason he asked being that more space is "wasted" with 512-byte
    sectors due to sector mark overhead.)

    The short answer is that most of the kernel assumes that disk sector sizes
    are a power of 2 and therefore can be represented via bit shifting 2068
    isn't a power of 2, so isn't eligible. 2048 might well be doable, though,
    if you really wanted it....

    | optimization to select the proper head, etc. Therefore I doubt
    | that the "real" block-size is 2068. In practice, it's usually
    | 512 or a multiple thereof.

    It has been suggested that they chose a format that makes the disk look as
    big as possible. That it's not *usable* in that format (to my knowledge, no
    other OS does 2068-byte sectors either) isn't significant to marketroids
    pushed to "demonstrate" their numbers....

    brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh]
    system administrator [WAY too many hats]
    electrical and computer engineering KF8NH
    carnegie mellon university

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.018 / U:3.452 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site