Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "pblocksize".
Did you mean:
blocksize
2020 Feb 10
0
Re: [RFC] lib: allow to specify physical/logical block size for disks
...block size?
I'm fairly sure we only need one of these. I'm just not
sure which one we need. I think we need to ask an expert
or look at the qemu / kernel code to find out exactly what
each setting really does.
> - I'm not sure I've made a good choise for parameter names: 'pblocksize'
> and 'lblocksize' respectively. I've tried to avoid long names like
> 'physicalblocksize' while keeping readability and semantic.
If we only have one, we can use "blocksize". But it does
require us to answer the previous one.
> - Do we want to add th...
2020 Feb 07
8
[RFC] lib: allow to specify physical/logical block size for disks
...for a drive separetely.
There are no documentation and tests yet. Input parameters are not
validated for correctness.
Here are my questions:
- Am I move in the right direction adding support for physical/logical
block size?
- I'm not sure I've made a good choise for parameter names: 'pblocksize'
and 'lblocksize' respectively. I've tried to avoid long names like
'physicalblocksize' while keeping readability and semantic.
- Do we want to add the same optional parameters to 'add_drive_scratch'
API method? I think it would be nice but it is up to you.
- What...
2020 Feb 10
2
Re: [RFC] lib: allow to specify physical/logical block size for disks
...make I/O request equals to (or multiple) this value. Otherwise
you might hit performance penalty. I think, the same is valid for
virtual disk image which is located on physical storage with 4K
physical sector size.
> > - I'm not sure I've made a good choise for parameter names: 'pblocksize'
> > and 'lblocksize' respectively. I've tried to avoid long names like
> > 'physicalblocksize' while keeping readability and semantic.
>
> If we only have one, we can use "blocksize". But it does
> require us to answer the previous one.
Her...