Re: FAT statfs loop abort on read-error

[Sancho Dauskardt]

At 00:54 08.07.03 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
>"Randy.Dunlap" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 13:57:19 +0200 Sancho Dauskardt <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > |   when calling statfs on a volume that has been removed (without umount)
> > | fat_statfs() will attempt to read all sectors of the fat table quite 
> a few
> > | times (depending on the fat type, eg. FAT16 --> 256 times).
>
>Yes, fat driver of 2.4 ignore the many errors.
>
> > | Possible solution:
> > | 1. let default_fat_access return something like -2 on 'can't read' error.
> > | 2. Abort stafs loop on error.
> > | 3. return -EIO
> > |
> > | This would break mode fat_access calls. I could make a patch, but I 
> don't
> > | know what's going on with those cvf extensions (which seem to replace
> > | fat_access). Is dmsdos dead / can we ignore it ?
> > | Somewhere in the list archives, I found comments about the cvf stuff 
> being
> > | completely removed ?
>
>I don't know anybody ported dmsdos to 2.4. The cvf stuff was removed
>and many error handlings was fixed on 2.5.x. So, personally I think to
>remove the cvf stuff and backport the some parts of fat driver to 2.4
>is good.

OK, the 100k diff between 2.4.21/fs/fat and 2.5.74 didn't really help me 
understand what's really changed (other than the cvf removal).
Should I attempt to brute-force backport fs/fat/* in one large patch, or 
incrementally re-apply the 2.5 changes to 2.4 ?

Or, as you write 'some parts', which parts would that be ?

- sda