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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans