Read support for fat_fallocate()? (was [v2] fat: editions tosupport fat_fallocate())
From: Andrew Bartlett
Date: Wed Feb 13 2013 - 21:48:43 EST
(apologies for the duplicate mail, I typo-ed the maintainers address)
I've been looking into the patch "[v2] fat: editions to support
fat_fallocate()" and I wonder if there is a way we can split this issue
in two, so that we get at least some of the patch into the kernel.
What I'm wanting to discuss (and perhaps implement, with you if
possible) is splitting this patch into writing to existing pre-allocated
files, and creating a new pre-allocation.
If Windows does, as you claim, simply read preallocations as zero, and
writes to them normally and without error, then Linux should do the
same. Here of course I'm assuming that Windows is not preallocating,
but instead simply trying to recover gracefully and safely from a simple
'file system corruption', where the sectors are allocated but not used.
The bulk of this patch is implementing this transparent recovery, and it
seem relatively harmless to include this into the kernel.
Then vendors doing TV streaming, or in my case copies of large files
onto Samba-mounted USB FAT devices, can add only the smaller patch to
implement fallocate, at their own risk and fully knowing that it will be
regarded as corrupt on Linux.
If accepted read support will, over a period of years, trickle down to
other Linux users, broadening the base that can still read these
'corrupt' drives, no matter the cause.
I hope you agree that this is a practical way forward, and I look
forward to working with you on this.
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/