Hi Alex, looking at the changes, I can see that the code is called for x86 as well. I would like to check if this is desirable - how it will map to the real scenarios - I mean what can be deduced from the fact that prtvtoc(1M) failed on x86 and what is the impact of subsequent call to format(1M) in those cases ?
To tell the truth, I am not quite convinced we should allow TI implicitly label disk, I think it should be controlled by the consumer instead. I remember there was some discussion about this that we might inadvertently destroy user's data. CCing Sundar, since if I remember correctly, he was raising those concerns. Cheers, Jan Alexander Eremin wrote: > I need review for Bug 3136 - TI fails to create VTOC on unlabeled disk > on Sparc. > > webrev : http://cr.opensolaris.org/~alhazred/3136/ > > Tests: > Usual test_ti: > # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/dsk/c0t3d0s0 count=16 > 16+0 records in > 16+0 records out > #./test_ti -c -x 3 -t v -d c0t3d0 > Test TI started in real mode... > Target type specified: VTOC > Config file not specified, default VTOC will be created > VTOC target prepared successfully > ERR: creating of VTOC target failed > > test_ti_static with fixed libti: > > # ./test_ti_static -c -x 3 -t v -d c0t3d0 > Test TI started in real mode... > Target type specified: VTOC > Config file not specified, default VTOC will be created > VTOC target prepared successfully > VTOC target created successfully > > > Thanks, >
