lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [Q] FAT driver enhancement
    From
    Date
    Jos Hulzink <josh@stack.nl> writes:

    > On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
    >
    > > Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> writes:
    > >
    > > > > I mean I/O error, not data damage.
    > > >
    > > > It is the block layer's responsibility to retry such soft errors and recover.
    > >
    > > Yes.
    >
    > But what about the data damage errors ?
    >
    > > > Probably the best you can do, is retry the read a few times if there
    > > > is an error reported, and then fail if it persists.
    > >
    > > Umm, there is a `copy of FAT table' for this kind of error. If the I/O
    > > error occurs, the FAT driver should use the other FAT table.
    >
    > How should the FAT driver know that the first FAT is bad if it doesn't
    > scan the FAT ? You don't want the second FAT to be used, you want the
    > mount to fail, and fsck.xxx to fix the mess. Who tells you that the second
    > copy of the FAT is the correct one, and not the first ?

    FAT16/FAT32 use the second entry of FAT table for data damage.
    The 1 bit of second entry is a clean/dirty unmount flag.

    But, it's not perfect. Furthermore, currently not implemented.
    --
    OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:22    [W:0.023 / U:118.980 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site