Am 05.07.2012 13:10, schrieb Markus Armbruster: > Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes: > >> Am 05.07.2012 11:23, schrieb Markus Armbruster: >>> Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> writes: >>> >>>> Am 29.06.2012 22:33, schrieb Blue Swirl: >>>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> + partition->length_sector_long = cpu_to_le32(s->bs->total_sectors >>>>>> + - >>>>>> s->first_sectors_number + 1); >>>> >>>> Just wondering... This should be the same as s->sector_count, right? >>> >>> Hmm. vvfat_open() assigns: >>> >>> s->sector_count = cyls * heads * secs - (s->first_sectors_number - 1); >>> bs->total_sectors = cyls * heads * secs; >>> >>> But it then changes it minds and does: >>> >>> s->sector_count = s->faked_sectors + >>> s->sectors_per_cluster*s->cluster_count; >> >> Which probably means that they differ if some sub-cluster sized space is >> left unused at the end of the disk. It's not useful to have this space >> included in the partition, but it doesn't hurt either. So I suppose >> either way is fine. > > Complication: the partition should end on a cylinder boundary. Shaving > off an unused tail may well interfere with that. Let's stick to v1 > here.
Good point. If anything, maybe add a comment. Kevin
