From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 29 20:47:22 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A071106564A for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:47:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@freebsd.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7EF98FC16 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:47:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from porto.topspin.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.100]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id XAA08768; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:47:18 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.topspin.kiev.ua ([127.0.0.1]) by porto.topspin.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1NwLrh-000GaJ-Pr; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:47:17 +0300 Message-ID: <4BB111D4.8060809@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:47:16 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100321) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fabian Keil References: <3a142e751003190508x6a06868ene2e8fd9ddd977f66@mail.gmail.com> <3a142e751003191021p141af009m6acf7d160c890cbb@mail.gmail.com> <20100319191133.46fe271c@r500.local> <3a142e751003191126j331e525fwb9e5573bbf6f7d58@mail.gmail.com> <4BAA30CB.1070707@icyb.net.ua> <20100328172537.501ed3d1@r500.local> <4BB0A053.9060007@freebsd.org> <20100329222920.5eef6395@r500.local> In-Reply-To: <20100329222920.5eef6395@r500.local> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Kostik Belousov , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: newfs_msdos and DVD-RAM X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:47:22 -0000 on 29/03/2010 23:29 Fabian Keil said the following: > Andriy Gapon wrote: >> Thus, clearly, it is a fault of a tool that formatted the media for FAT. >> It should have picked correct values, or rejected incorrect values if >> those were provided as overrides via command line options. > > The kernel still shouldn't panic, though. A quick reply to this point only - yes, I completely agree. But remember that the panic happened only after the sources were modified :) Jokes aside, mountmsdosfs() should reject incorrect combination of bytes/sector and sectors/cluster and should produce proper diagnostics for that. -- Andriy Gapon