Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Apr 2002 09:07:03 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: [Q] FAT driver enhancement |
| |
On Tue, Apr 02 2002, Mike Fedyk wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 10:27:52PM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > > Helge Hafting <helgehaf@aitel.hist.no> writes: > > > > > OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > > > > > > > > Jos Hulzink <josh@stack.nl> writes: > > > > > Questions: > > > > > > > > > > 1) How do you think about the checking of the FAT tables ? It definitely > > > > > will slow down the mount. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately if FAT table has bad sector, FAT tables may not be the > > > > same. > > > > > > And then you don't want to mount unless you know what you > > > are doing. And those knowing what they are doing can be bothered > > > to use some kind of "force" option in this case. Or perhaps an > > > option that selects which FAT to trust. > > > > I mean I/O error, not data damage. > > It is the block layer's responsibility to retry such soft errors and recover.
No it's the low level driver
> 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.
I/O error retrying from the fs is a bad idea, the low level driver should already have exhausted the possibilities to recover the data. If the fs receives an I/O error, that's the final result and retrying would serve no sane purpose.
-- Jens Axboe
- 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/
| |