![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Is there any way to detect the CHS information of a block device by only a software in Linux? I think the analysis of elapse time of reading a block which has various distance of each another. |
#3
| ||||||
| ||||||
|
|
Seongsu Lee <senux (AT) senux (DOT) com> writes: Is there any way to detect the CHS information of a block device by only a software in Linux? I think the analysis of elapse time of reading a block which has various distance of each another. You could try this, but be aware that: (a) Track-to-track seek times are smaller than rotational latency. If you can't figure out how to deal with rotational latency, you will have to do a very large number of reads to extract any statistically significant measurement of what causes a seek. |
|
(b) There's random variation in the disk introduced by such things as temperature compensation. Again this means you'll need an awful lot of sector reads to learn anything. |
|
(c) Head switch times are too small to measure reliably. |
|
(d) The number of sectors per track varies from point to point on the drive. |
|
What are you trying to figure out? This doesn't seem a useful thing to do. |
|
Anton |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hey, is that you again, babblebot? |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
Folkert Rienstra wrote: Hey, is that you again, babblebot? Shut up, Folkert. |
|
The S/N ratio in c.a.s. has been fairly decent lately, |
|
until you crawled back out from under your rock. Please crawl back in again. - bill |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Bill Todd" <billtodd (AT) metrocast (DOT) net> wrote Folkert Rienstra wrote: Hey, is that you again, babblebot? Shut up, Folkert. And you are? |
|
The S/N ratio in c.a.s. has been fairly decent lately, No wonder, when no one in your group was actually able enough to offer a solution to the OP. No one with even a glimpse of a clue. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |