Re: fs/tmpfs/t_vnd/basic fails

[SAITOH Masanobu <msaitoh%execsw.org@localhost>]

(2012/09/08 14:10), Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> I wrote:
> 
>> msaitoh@ wrote:
>>
>>>> # newfs /dev/rvnd3a
>>>> newfs: /dev/rvnd3a: open for read: Device not configured
>>>
>>>  It seems it's evbarm specific bug..........
>>
>> I guess the test is wrong, i.e. it depends on sys/kern/subr_disk_mbr.c,
>> which reports partition a is 4.2BSD if the disk has no disklabel.
>>
>> What about "newfs -I /dev/rvnd3a" ?
> 
> Ah, arm/disksubr.c doesn't fill partition a.

hm

> # disklabel vnd3
> # /dev/rvnd3c:
> type: vnd
> disk: vnd
> label: fictitious
> flags:
> bytes/sector: 512
> sectors/track: 32
> tracks/cylinder: 64
> sectors/cylinder: 2048
> cylinders: 10
> total sectors: 20480
> rpm: 3600
> interleave: 1
> trackskew: 0
> cylinderskew: 0
> headswitch: 0           # microseconds
> track-to-track seek: 0  # microseconds
> drivedata: 0
> 
> 3 partitions:
> #        size    offset     fstype [fsize bsize cpg/sgs]
>  c:     20480         0     unused      0     0        # (Cyl.      0 -      
> 9)
> disklabel: boot block size 0
> disklabel: super block size 0

I see :-)



> The test should probably be "newfs -I /dev/rvnd3[raw partition]",
> or explicitly write disklabel.

Should we fill partition a in arm/disksubr.c?

> ---
> Izumi Tsutsui
> 


-- 
-----------------------------------------------
                SAITOH Masanobu (msaitoh%execsw.org@localhost
                                 msaitoh%netbsd.org@localhost)