вт, 11 лют. 2020 о 17:20 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com> пише:
I pushed this with some trailing whitespace fixes, and I dropped the
change to tmp/.gitignore since the test does clean up after itself. I
also fixed test-qemu-drive-with-blocksize-libvirt.sh so it doesn't
actually open /dev/sda etc on the host (don't run tests as root!)
Thanks!
However ...
We already use blocksize as an optional parameter to mkfs. While they
don't directly conflict, it is confusing. Is there a reason we
shouldn't call this new parameter "sectorsize"?
We can change the parameter name any time up til we make the next
stable release.
But mkfs has 'sectorsize' optional parameter as well. :-)
Here are my thoughts:
1. Our 'blocksize' parameter is related to disks and it's using everywhere in
context of disks. It hardly can confuse users with mkfs' blocksize which is
related to a file system.
2. Under the hood this parameter is tied to physical/logical block size so it
named accordingly.
--
Mykola Ivanets