AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20090320151004.3864df9c@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:mail.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<rendell.fong@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@exch1.onstor.net/INBOX	0	2779531E7C760D4491C96305019FEEB52AC74C9170@exch1.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:10:48 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: Rendell Fong <rendell.fong@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: please review - change 32139
Message-ID: <20090320151048.004eab1e@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <2779531E7C760D4491C96305019FEEB52AC74C9170@exch1.onstor.net>
References: <20090320125819.68310d99@ripper.onstor.net>
	<2779531E7C760D4491C96305019FEEB52AC74C9170@exch1.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:30:57 -0700 Rendell Fong
<rendell.fong@onstor.com> wrote:

> Not that it matters much, but I think our usage of ext2fs_open() is
> not quite right.  We are passing a device+filename string as the fs
> name with flags set to 0 while a usage example in the original code
> (see file mkjournal.c) passes just the device string as the fs name
> with flags set to EXT2_FLAG_RW.

Hmm, I'm guessing 0 == EXT2_FLAG_RO (I hope), and I further hope that
it ignores or otherwise does something innocuous with the filename.
What would it do with the name, anyway?  Maybe it uses it to create
some kind of hash lookup scheme, or caching of something.


> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Sharp
> > Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 12:58 PM
> > To: Rendell Fong
> > Cc: Jonathan Goldick; Brian Stark
> > Subject: Re: please review - change 32139
> > 
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:50:57 -0700 Rendell Fong
> > <rendell.fong@onstor.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Here's the updated change list.
> > >
> > >
> > > Change 32139 by rendellf@rendellf-test on 2009/03/19 12:56:15
> > > *pending*
> > >
> > > TED26011: can't load kernel from second CF card (sdb1)
> > 
> > Do you have a copy of the built prom image I can try?  I'd like to
> > fire it up and run it for a bit.  BTW, in no way is 4.0.2 to be
> > held for this unless JG or Brian says otherwise.  I asked for it to
> > be downgraded to a P3 but I don't know if that actually happened
> > yet.
