Christian Zigotzky - 02.07.23, 06:37:50 CEST: > On 02 July 2023 at 04:17 am, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > I'm sorry to say I cannot see a new RDB partition bug her, just the > > result of undefined behaviour due to overflowing a 32 bit nr_sect > > size calculation in the old RDB code. […] > Thanks a lot for your explanation! > > Actually, we need your patch because there is a very old bug but there > are some endusers with RDB disks with Linux partitions. If I apply > your patch to our kernels, then I need an enduser friendly solution > for fixing the issue with their file systems. I have read through the last mails without commenting. I admit: I do not yet get what is wrong here? A checksum was miscalculated? Is this a regular thing to happen when using RDB disks with Linux partitions? I do not yet get how this issue happens. What are the steps to reproduce it? And how likely is it to run into it? > Do you have a solution for the enduser (consumer)? How can they fix > their file systems? The next issue is, if an enduser uses an old > unpatched kernel with a partition, created with a new patched kernel. > I don't know how can I handle this issue in the consumer support. > > I can't help all endusers and some are not active in forums etc. How many end users are you speaking of? Back then I thought I was the only one using a hard disk with mixed Amiga/Linux RDB setup. Best, -- Martin
