Am 21.03.2023 um 16:54 schrieb Tom Rini:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 04:53:22PM +0100, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
Am 21.03.2023 um 16:35 schrieb Tom Rini:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 08:43:07AM +0100, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
Am 20.03.2023 um 18:01 schrieb Tom Rini:
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 01:04:13PM +0100, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier wrote:
From: Stefan Herbrechtsmeier <stefan.herbrechtsme...@weidmueller.com>
Do not mangle lower or mixed case filenames which fit into the upper
case 8.3 short filename. This ensures FAT standard compatible short
filenames (SFN) to support systems without long filename (LFN) support
like boot roms (ex. SFN BOOT.BIN instead of BOOT~1.BIN for LFN
boot.bin).
Signed-off-by: Stefan Herbrechtsmeier <stefan.herbrechtsme...@weidmueller.com>
---
fs/fat/fat_write.c | 11 +++++++----
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Can we update test/py/tests/test_fs/ somewhere to have a test for this
case? Thanks.
What is the recommended approach to test internal behavior? The short name
isn't avialable at the terminal because u-boot support VFAT.
Well, you triggered this problem with a filesystem that had contents
that were "just so" and then didn't work as expected, yes?
No, I write a file to a file system and the boot rom do not find the file
because the name was wrong (BOOT~1.BIN instead of BOOT.BIN).
The mdir command shows the short and long file name. I will add a
test_fat.py with a test.
Ah, ok, and great, thanks!
I have send a separate patch `test: fs: Check fat short file name` or
should I send a new series with both patches?
Regards
Stefan
