Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:12:23 +0200
From:      Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: glabel for ufs: size check is overzealous?
Message-ID:  <9bbcef730904220612s3ff4308fpc1d18e216a5c7773@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49EF1766.7030401@icyb.net.ua>
References:  <49EDCA21.70908@icyb.net.ua> <gskrld$vo0$1@ger.gmane.org>  <49EDF80F.3070105@icyb.net.ua> <gsl446$vae$1@ger.gmane.org>  <49EF1645.70704@icyb.net.ua> <9bbcef730904220608y73cbf2d2s6921b05c1978a121@mail.gmail.com>  <49EF1766.7030401@icyb.net.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2009/4/22 Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>:
> on 22/04/2009 16:08 Ivan Voras said the following:
>> 2009/4/22 Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>:
>>> on 21/04/2009 21:43 Ivan Voras said the following:
>>>> Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>>>> I don't see why it should and - no, it actually does not.
>>>>> fsck checks only filesystem's internal consistency, it doesn't check media size, etc.
>>>> Well yes, if the number of blocks is really incorrect it should be
>>>> visible from the arrangement of the metadata but still - that makes the
>>>> field almost useless doesn't it?
>>> How do you mean?
>>> The field tells the filesystem size, how it can be useless?
>>
>> If nothing checks it and everything works, I'd say it's usefulness is
>> a bit limited...
>
> ufs driver doesn't check it, the driver *uses* it, so... :-)

But as you said, fsck will not fix an invalid value?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef730904220612s3ff4308fpc1d18e216a5c7773>