[parted-devel] [PATCH 04/14] do not discard bootcode from extended partition

[Joel Granados]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 10:10:16AM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 03:30:52PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Joel Granados Moreno wrote:
> > > From: Petr Uzel <petr.uzel at suse.cz>
> > >
> > > * libparted/labels/dos.c (write_ext_table): Do not discard
> > > bootcode from extended partition on msdos label when some of
> > > the logical partitions are changed.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Petr Uzel <petr.uzel at suse.cz>
> > > ---
> > >  libparted/labels/dos.c |    6 ++++--
> > >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/libparted/labels/dos.c b/libparted/labels/dos.c
> > > index f219e7d..4e308fe 100644
> > > --- a/libparted/labels/dos.c
> > > +++ b/libparted/labels/dos.c
> > > @@ -1060,7 +1060,8 @@ write_ext_table (const PedDisk* disk,
> > >
> > >  	lba_offset = ped_disk_extended_partition (disk)->geom.start;
> > >
> > > -	memset (&table, 0, sizeof (DosRawTable));
> > > +	ped_device_read (disk->dev, &table, sector, 1);
> > > +	memset (&(table.partitions), 0, 4 * sizeof(DosRawPartition));
> > >  	table.magic = PED_CPU_TO_LE16 (MSDOS_MAGIC);
> > >
> > >  	if (!fill_raw_part (&table.partitions[0], logical, sector))
> > > @@ -1094,7 +1095,8 @@ write_empty_table (const PedDisk* disk, PedSector sector)
> > >
> > >  	PED_ASSERT (disk != NULL, return 0);
> > >
> > > -	memset (&table, 0, sizeof (DosRawTable));
> > > +	ped_device_read (disk->dev, &table, sector, 1);
> > > +	memset (&(table.partitions), 0, 4 * sizeof(DosRawPartition));
> > >  	table.magic = PED_CPU_TO_LE16 (MSDOS_MAGIC);
> > >
> > >  	return ped_device_write (disk->dev, (void*) &table, sector, 1);
> > 
> > This has the same problem I mentioned for 1/14:
> > it introduces new code that depends on fixed-size (512-byte) sectors.
> > Thus it conflicts with changes on "next" that eliminated the 512-byte
> > limitation.
> > 
> > How about putting it on that branch instead?
> 
> 
> Same answer as above....

Wait!!! How does this conflict with changes in the next branch?  Are you
talking about your local changes?  If you are pls commit so I can
address this.  Additionally, how does this depend on the sector size?
Does the ped_device_read call change in your local next branch?  And
"memset (&(table.partitions), 0, 4 * sizeof(DosRawPartition))" will be
valid for all secto sizes.  I mean, the RawPartition definition will not
change even though the sector size does.

Regards.

> 
> -- 
> Joel Andres Granados
> Brno, Czech Republic, Red Hat.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> parted-devel mailing list
> parted-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel

-- 
Joel Andres Granados
Brno, Czech Republic, Red Hat.