On Monday 03 September 2018 16:17:26 OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Windows fastfat.sys driver accepts also media types 0x00 and 0x01 and
> > sector sizes 128 and 256 bytes. Linux mkfs.fat can format disk also to
> > larger FAT sector sizes then 4096 bytes, therefore relax also upper limit
> > restriction.
>
> > - if (!is_power_of_2(bpb->fat_sector_size)
> > - || (bpb->fat_sector_size < 512)
> > - || (bpb->fat_sector_size > 4096)) {
> > + if (!is_power_of_2(bpb->fat_sector_size)) {
>
> Just relaxing validation doesn't work. The block layer doesn't support
> smaller than 512, and lager than PAGE_SIZE. (And in specification, fat
> doesn't support lager than 4096.)
Hi! I just sent this patch for discussion, with links to (now open
source) Windows implementation. I guess that Windows driver
implementation is more "authoritative" then Microsoft's own
specification. It is known that Windows implementation does not match
Microsoft specification.
I know at least 3 FAT specifications (MS EFI FAT, MS/SD card FAT,
ECMA-107) and you are right that Microsoft's one does not allow sector
sizes larger then 4096.
If there is limitation by block layer, then:
1) Why we do not check for PAGE_SIZE?
2) Is check in fat driver really needed (if block layer checks it)?
> > static inline int fat_valid_media(u8 media)
> > {
> > - return 0xf8 <= media || media == 0xf0;
> > + return 0xf8 <= media || media == 0xf0 || media == 0x00 || media == 0x01;
> > }
> > #endif /* !_LINUX_MSDOS_FS_H */
>
> This is ok though, this would be for ancient floppy media.
Ok.
--
Pali Rohár
pali.ro...@gmail.com
