X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C7FF73846420
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1712144750;
	bh=MDVVUT+DYcTS/i1bQLeMCCaQ3+H3/ot4yixvja0HBRU=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	From;
	b=YfJiTPimCwAUk2ltBZ70gaf5jrARnmTcQ+yOjA/AKwfCHcwc7qH3jdKl7xd/dCfoN
	q+9mPLt7DnjksZ/kq9GavAI2U8F9ZnhIdvGGKJaRA/0QkThaIDy33wp7ixJTQ5rGSR
	RC0/+WbLYC6jyKBsYZ1Oqxo/W6J1OnkdEfGA73VQ=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 602683847718
Date:	Wed, 3 Apr 2024 13:44:49 +0200
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Cygwin&Win32 file prefetch, block sizes?
Message-ID:	<Zg1BMelQusmzuhmK@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<CANH4o6Mxai4_C=d1P93Prrimb8_H=trTwm-Eg+WBwpomN3tNJw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<ZgwFNde2z804koS_ AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
	<CANH4o6P8cts9TJgpdjR4mi+sj2YvuDa=d49XLcEVvYnRB81KRw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<Zg0P-JRyEyiyZJCP AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<Zg0P-JRyEyiyZJCP@calimero.vinschen.de>
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Apr  3 10:14, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
>   https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/ddi/ntddk/ns-ntddk-_file_fs_sector_size_information
> 
>   If the filesystem is local and SSINFO_FLAGS_NO_SEEK_PENALTY is set, we
>   could stick to 64K.
> 
>   Otherwise the PhysicalBytesPerSectorForPerformance member might be
>   helpful I guess.  Needs checking, of course.

It's not helpful. This is the output for NTFS:
  (gdb) p ffssi
  $5 = {LogicalBytesPerSector = 512, PhysicalBytesPerSectorForAtomicity = 512,
    PhysicalBytesPerSectorForPerformance = 512,
    FileSystemEffectivePhysicalBytesPerSectorForAtomicity = 512, Flags = 11,
    ByteOffsetForSectorAlignment = 0, ByteOffsetForPartitionAlignment = 0}

D'oh

>   If this isn't any good, we can still fallback to
>   FILE_FS_FULL_SIZE_INFORMATION as in fhandler_base::fstatvfs_by_handle,
>   https://cygwin.com/cgit/newlib-cygwin/tree/winsup/cygwin/fhandler/disk_file.cc#n661

So ffsi.BytesPerSector * ffsi.SectorsPerAllocationUnit is it then.

But:

> On Apr  3 00:35, Martin Wege via Cygwin wrote:
> > While I can understand the motivation, FAT32 on multi-GB-devices
> > having 64k block size, and Win32 API on Win95/98/ME/Win7 being
> > optimized to that insane block size, it is absolutely WRONG with
> > today's NTFS and even more so with ReFS.

So this has supposedly changed with Win8. Where's that publically
documented?


Corinna

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -