From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265065AbUGCEXG (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jul 2004 00:23:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265074AbUGCEXG (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jul 2004 00:23:06 -0400 Received: from mail.parknet.co.jp ([210.171.160.6]:23563 "EHLO mail.parknet.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265065AbUGCEXD (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jul 2004 00:23:03 -0400 To: Cc: akpm@osdl.org, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fat/inode.c References: From: OGAWA Hirofumi Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 13:22:39 +0900 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <871xjt4t4g.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org writes: > Two years ago, OGAWA Hirofumi removed some ugly code and > added a few simple tests to the FAT filesystem code, > intended to avoid recognizing non-FAT as FAT (for people who > fail to specify rootfstype=, forcing the kernel to guess). Yes. > That worked fairly well, until this year. > I have now seen a thread in Czech and a report from Holland > that involved the "FAT: bogus sectors-per-track value" > error message. > > The patch below removes this test again. The advantage is that > some real-life FAT filesystems can be mounted again. > The disadvantage that more non-FAT fss will be accepted as FAT. > > Ferry van Steen reports > "the patch Andries Brouwer gave me seems to work". Sounds good. Please apply. -- OGAWA Hirofumi