* Re: FATFS bug [not found] <44dd56d50805130502x5eed697ehda610882330fbb17@mail.gmail.com> @ 2008-05-13 17:58 ` Andrew Lunn 2009-01-09 15:59 ` Jonathan Larmour 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Andrew Lunn @ 2008-05-13 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Savin Zlobec; +Cc: eCos Patches On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 02:02:58PM +0200, Savin Zlobec wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I've only recently read your mail on ecos-devel about fatfs '.' and '..' bug. > Please find attached the fix. Hi Savin Thanks for the fix. I have committed it. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: FATFS bug 2008-05-13 17:58 ` FATFS bug Andrew Lunn @ 2009-01-09 15:59 ` Jonathan Larmour 2009-01-12 6:15 ` Savin Zlobec 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Larmour @ 2009-01-09 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Savin Zlobec; +Cc: eCos Patches Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 02:02:58PM +0200, Savin Zlobec wrote: >> I've only recently read your mail on ecos-devel about fatfs '.' and '..' bug. >> Please find attached the fix. > > Thanks for the fix. I have committed it. [Patch in https://bugzilla.ecoscentric.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1000539 ] Hi Savin, I was looking at this patch. There's an aspect I'm unsure about. I admit I haven't found any reason why it would go wrong (although that took a lot head scratching!), but it seems to be a bit odd for a node for "." to be added to the node cache where the parent cluster is actually that of a subdirectory. Is this definitely the intended solution? I'm just worried about unintended side-effects, given that you can then have multiple nodes pointing to the same directory entry from different directions, so to speak. Jifl -- eCosCentric Limited http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos experts Barnwell House, Barnwell Drive, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 1223 245571 Registered in England and Wales: Reg No 4422071. ------["Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere"]------ Opinions==mine ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: FATFS bug 2009-01-09 15:59 ` Jonathan Larmour @ 2009-01-12 6:15 ` Savin Zlobec 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Savin Zlobec @ 2009-01-12 6:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jonathan Larmour; +Cc: eCos Patches On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Jonathan Larmour <jifl@ecoscentric.com> wrote: > Hi Savin, > > I was looking at this patch. There's an aspect I'm unsure about. I admit I > haven't found any reason why it would go wrong (although that took a lot > head scratching!), but it seems to be a bit odd for a node for "." to be > added to the node cache where the parent cluster is actually that of a > subdirectory. Is this definitely the intended solution? I'm just worried > about unintended side-effects, given that you can then have multiple nodes > pointing to the same directory entry from different directions, so to speak. Hi Jifl, It should be ok, but I'll recheck the patch to be sure. Regards, Savin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-01-12 6:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <44dd56d50805130502x5eed697ehda610882330fbb17@mail.gmail.com>
2008-05-13 17:58 ` FATFS bug Andrew Lunn
2009-01-09 15:59 ` Jonathan Larmour
2009-01-12 6:15 ` Savin Zlobec
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).