Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> That source seems to check power_of_2(size) and 128 <= size <= >> 4096. Rather why do you want to support larger than 4096? Or I'm missing >> something? > > I looked into (Linux) mkfs.fat and it supports formatting disk also with > sector size > 4096. Therefore I thought it may be good idea for ability > to mount and use it (on Linux). > > I could check what other operating system would do with FAT sector size > larger then 4096. If there is real user to use that, I'm ok though (of course, need serious tests). However, FAT would be for exchange data with other devices, and there is "cluster per sector", and spec recommends sector size == device sector size. So I suspect this format is not useful. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
