linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] msdos fs: remove unsettable atari option

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 03 Jun 2008 00:03:40 +0900
From:	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To:	Petr Stehlik <pstehlik@...hics.cz>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	� <rene.scharfe@...fire.ath.cx>,
	Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] msdos fs: remove unsettable atari option

Petr Stehlik <pstehlik@...hics.cz> writes:

> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>> Geert Uytterhoeven has a patch in his POSTPONED queue that is supposed
>>>> to fix Atari FAT.  I can't speak to whether it works or why it's
>>>> postponed, but it seems to compile.
>>> I see. Although I don't know the patch, I'd like to add this part to
>>> Geert's patch if possible. And when the patch can be posted, we can
>>> re-add this part again.
>>>
>>> Geert, what do you think?
>> 
>> It's in POSTPONED state because nobody speaks up for/against it.
>> Personally, I don't know how much it is (still) needed...
>> But a few years ago somebody contacted me that he used it succesfully
>> on PA-RISC and i386 ;-)
>> 
>> BTW, the patch is
>> http://linux-m68k-cvs.ubb.ca/~geert/linux-m68k-patches-2.6/POSTPONED/134-atari-fat.diff
>> 
>> Atari people, I think now is the time to let it live or die...
>
> The patch looks good, how can I let it live?

Could you test whether it works well? If it works fine, I'll merge and
clean it up. If it doesn't work, please fix it.

BTW,

+		if (sbi->fat_bits != 32 && total_clusters+2 > sbi->
+			fat_length*SECTOR_SIZE*8/sbi->fat_bits)
+			sbi->fat_bits = 12;

SECTOR_SIZE should be sb->s_blocksize? Or Atari doesn't support the
sector size other than 512 bytes?

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
--
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/