![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, Andries Brouwer wrote: > > My post implicitly suggested the minimal thing to do. > It will not be enough - heuristics are never enough - > but it probably helps in most cases. I don't mind the 0x00/0x80 "boot flag" checks - those look fairly obvious and look reasonably safe to add to the partitioning code. There are other checks that can be done - verifying that the start/end sector values are at all sensible. We do _some_ of that, but only for partitions 3 and 4, for example. We could do more - like checking the actual sector numbers (but I think some formatters leave them as zero). Which actually makes me really nervous - it implies that we've probably seen partitions 1&2 contain garbage there, and the problem is that if you'r etoo careful in checking, you will make a system unusable. This is why it is so much nicer to be overly permissive ratehr than being a stickler for having all the values right. And your random byte checks for power-of-2 make no sense. What are they based on? Linus - 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 13:48 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||