Robert Collins wrote: > On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 10:57 +0000, danwood76 wrote: > >> You could do a probe for the ICH10 tag for now. >> That would probably be safer than guessing a dereference, then we need some >> more ICH10R based people to test which will take time. >> >> You could try building another RAID set with a couple of other disks and >> see if the meta is in the same place on those disks also. >> > > I think the ICH10 tag is actually a serial or some such; its at an odd > spot there. > > What do you think of treating GAFR as a magic bytes, then using the > sector offset following that? > > As long as the final location is checked for still being > 0 we won't > try to read negative offsets, and the followup is_isw call will fail on > non-isw environments. > > It seems pretty safe to me to assume that: > find GAFR > follow a word sector offset > find a 10 byte isw signature > > is only going to occur when someone actually has a ICH environment. > > re testing: I don't have any disks I can wipe I'm sorry. > > -Rob > > Sounds good, if someone else with ICH10 can test it would be great. Write a patch based on your idea and I will test it to verify it still works with ICH8 also but I obviously cannot test the ICH10.
regards, Dnany -- intel isw raid metadata at odd offset https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs