-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 1/9/2015 2:44 PM, Steven Lang wrote: > It's a bit of a long story, but the short answer was that I was > testing some aspects of 4k sector size with different combinations > of commits. When I had included 80678b but not fa815a, ext2 > detection failed because the geometry of the ext2 filesystem would > always exceed the geometry of the device.
Failed where though? I can't see anywhere that geometry is actually used. You mention the commits allowing filesystem detection to work at all on 4k drives, and allowing you to ignore partitions ( not filesystems ) that do not fit inside the disk, but I don't seem to have a problem detecting ext4 and don't get any warning about it being too large. > I don't think the current code shows any effects of the bug, > though conceivably if the filesystem detection were to detect two > different filesystems on a device with 4k sector size, it would > rarely pick ext2/3/4 as the "correct" one even if it was, due to > the size being so grossly off. But barring that rather contrived > and probably carefully crafted situation, I can't see anywhere it > would be an issue in the current code base since the geometry > returned by the filesystem is only used to find the best fit. Ahh, I forgot about the old rescue command. Oddly though, it doesn't seem to work even on a 512 byte sector disk. I'll have to figure out why. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUsDGMAAoJENRVrw2cjl5R6iYIAKjgp89jGvETmBtbCVplqLaR VRQGRuKcYaYpalVyG2n5p8oTk6x/kX64KOQ+8FeOttWJ3BveQmAgafRqkYy9gN2+ rLjmlctZDQkCyN/J9uPKUEDQ9jV4IZ7vlQphLBsYs0oF+Wf/otP1AZN4ZcgkLMfP /nE8AhJ3cUhF9KOZYXHKEqV+0EH6UBQR2BcZ5uMSIBS7ukFd6DwrHegVxIFDS2DM 8Ldertb2VUkGXJWOcfrTc7bgss3N9hwRZT5pDuw9NWsdZ1mkIekEtxeHp1YoNkhh iXG89XgdLkOKGChj6lYzeqk3TMSsF3RdF3xZynh1eT95nqHsAJFHuLZLx5mXf0I= =5m0+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
