lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRE: [PATCH 1/4] exfat: redefine PBR as boot_sector
    Date
    > > [snip]
    > >> +/* EXFAT: Main and Backup Boot Sector (512 bytes) */ struct
    > >> +boot_sector {
    > >> + __u8 jmp_boot[BOOTSEC_JUMP_BOOT_LEN];
    > >> + __u8 oem_name[BOOTSEC_OEM_NAME_LEN];
    > >
    > > According to the exFAT specification, fs_name and BOOTSEC_FS_NAME_LEN
    > > look better.
    >
    > Oops.
    > I sent v2 patches, before I noticed this comment,
    >
    > I'll make another small patch, OK?

    No, It make sense to make v3, because you have renamed the variables in
    boot_sector on this patch.

    > BTW
    > I have a concern about fs_name.
    > The exfat specification says that this field is "EXFAT".
    >
    > I think it's a important field for determining the filesystem.
    > However, in this patch, I gave up checking this field.
    > Because there is no similar check in FATFS.
    > Do you know why Linux FATFS does not check this filed?
    > And, what do you think of checking this field?

    FATFS has the same field named "oem_name" and whatever is okay for its value.
    However, in case of exFAT, it is an important field to determine filesystem.

    I think it would be better to check this field for exFAT-fs.
    Would you like to contribute new patch for checking it?

    >
    > BR

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-05-29 07:29    [W:3.828 / U:0.100 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site