Is that wrong, or am I missing something else?
Well, I guess that you could end up with the third 512b-block failing and so
your 4k chunk written halfway through. Whoever cares about that.
On Dec 2, 2012, at 5:00 AM, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 06:19:37PM +0100, J. Hannken-Illjes wrote:
In short the attached diff:
- Adds a new kernel-internal errno ERESTARTVOP and changes VCALL() to
restart a vnode operation once it returns
On 29 Nov, 2012, at 22:54 , Mouse mo...@rodents-montreal.org wrote:
I'm also trying hard, but failing, to ignore the issue which revealed
the current problem, that being having an application as important as
a DHCP client needing to use BPF to send and receive UDP packets
rather than using
On Sun, 2 Dec 2012 07:41:56 +0900
Izumi Tsutsui tsut...@ceres.dti.ne.jp wrote:
IIRC RTL8139 doc says the chip reads the values from EEPROM automatically.
We should follow what 8169 doc specifies, but I don't have 8169 docs.
I checked the 8169 doc. In the EEPROM section there is the following
[Dennis, sorry for the off-list copy of a similar reply; my botch.]
I believe every use of BPF by an application to send and receive
protocol traffic is a signal that something is missing in the
host's network implementation, [...]
...in general, I agree, but in the case of DHCP, I'm not so
On Sun, 2 Dec 2012 04:04:23 +
David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 03:22:24AM +, Julian Yon wrote:
It's not weird, and there is a gain; it's for compatibility with
large amounts of deployed code that assumes all devices have
512-byte blocks.
mo...@rodents-montreal.org (Mouse) writes:
These disks lie about their actual sector size.
These disks just follow their specification.
That's as meaningless as...on, to pick an unreasonably extreme example,
a hitman saying I was just following orders.
Apparently as meaningless saying lies
jul...@yon.org.uk (Julian Yon) writes:
If it's smaller than the atomic write size that's equally weird.
Because that implies that the designers have made the explicit decision
to sacrifice performance for no gain.
The gain of course is that people can use the drive and will buy it.
--
--
