Messages in this thread | | | From | "Ghozlane Toumi" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sgi partitionning fix (Was: 2.6.0-test1 on alpha : disk label numbering trouble) | Date | Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:00:13 +0200 |
| |
You wrote : > On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:45:12PM +0200, Ghozlane Toumi wrote: > > > However, I found out that sgi partitionning had this "renumbering" > > issue even before viro's patch. > > I don't know if this is correct, in any case this is an untested patch > > that changes this behaviour for sgi partitions. > > patch is attached because of dumb mailer. > > -------------------- > > for(i = 0; i < 16; i++, p++) { > > blocks = be32_to_cpu(p->num_blocks); > > start = be32_to_cpu(p->first_block); > > if (blocks) > > - put_partition(state, slot++, start, blocks); > > + put_partition(state, i+1, start, blocks); > > } > > -------------------- > > Hmm. The previous change was not because there is something > intrinsically good with some way of numbering partitions, > but because it is very inconvenient when partition numbering > changes. Yes, you are right. It's just tht looking at similar paritionning code, like osf, sun, ultrix, I didn't see/know why sgi would be different. but I've never approached an sgi in my life and thus don't know anything about irix partitionnnig uses.
> But here the 2.6 behaviour is already that of 2.4.21, and you > change away from that. Not a good idea.
Agreed, obviously.
ghoz
- 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/
| |