[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Parted 1.5.5-pre4

From: Andrew Clausen
Subject: Re: Parted 1.5.5-pre4
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:02:50 +1100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.17i

On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 03:43:05PM -0600, address@hidden wrote:
> > So, what happens when the sector size != 512?
> Take for example 1K sectors.  Then the PMBR is 1 sector, the GPT headers are
> each 1 sector, and the partition table entries (normally 32 sectors) are
> instead 16 sectors (they're defined to be minimum of 16K, where the headers
> and pmbr are defined to be 1 sector each).
> > Must partitions be aligned to the sector size?
> Yes.  All partitions are described as start/end pairs on logical blocks (the
> device's idea of a sector).  So far we've only used disks with 512-byte
> sectors, but that isn't strictly required.  One *could* use 2048 byte
> sectors.  I thought that dev->sector_size wasn't hard-coded to 512, but
> asked the device what its sector size is and uses that?  I tried to replace
> all references to 512 (except in the header struct definition) to be
> dev->sector_size for this reason.

I've looked over this again, trying to figure out what we need to do.
It looks like it's a little work...

Are there any sample partition tables with sector_size != 512 for
me to look at?

Are "LBA" values (i.e. fields of on-disk structs with LBA in the name)
in 512 sectors, or sector_size sectors?

Also, I see no sector_size field in the GPT header... are we meant to
rely on the hardware for this?!


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]