[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1171984908.4039.42.camel@sauron>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:21:48 +0200
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...radead.org>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frank Haverkamp <haver@...t.ibm.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/44 take 2] [UBI] internal common header
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 09:55 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > What do you mean? It is internal version just for future help: if we
> > develop incompatible UBI2 the old UBI will reject the new images.
>
> In that case it's not an *implementation* version number, but rather
> an on-disk *format* version number.
True, will refine the comment.
> There's a difference. It's also
> often not used much, since another way of dealing with the problem is
> to mark major each on-disk version with a different magic number.
The advantage of version is that UBI can distinguish between garbage and
incompatible image. If I meet wrong magic - what is it - rubbish,
corrupted header? Should I run recovery procedure? Having version is
just cleaner.
> Why isn't this being done via #define? It's not like this is any kind
> of an enumerated type, especially since it's being installed into a
> 32bit type, and not even an enum type.
Will be fixed, thanks.
--
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists