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:0.094 / U:2.560 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site