Re: BTRFS partition usage...

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Feb 12 2008 09:08, Chris Mason wrote:
>> >
>> >So, if Btrfs starts zeroing at 1k, will that be acceptable for you?
>>
>> Something looks wrong here. Why would btrfs need to zero at all?
>> Superblock at 0, and done. Just like xfs.
>> (Yes, I had xfs on sparc before, so it's not like you NEED the
>> whitespace at the start of a partition.)
>
>I've had requests to move the super down to 64k to make room for bootloaders, 
>which may not matter for sparc, but I don't really plan on different 
>locations for different arches.

In x86, there is even more space for a bootloader (some 28k or so)
even if your partition table is as closely packed as possible,
from 0 to 7e00 IIRC.

For sparc you could have something like

			startlba	endlba	type
	sda1		0		2	1 Boot
	sda2		2		58	3 Whole disk
	sda3		58		90000	83 Linux

and slap the bootloader into "MBR", just like on x86.
Or I am missing something..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/