> On 5/11/21 4:21 PM, Namjae Jeon wrote: > >> Hi Namjae - > > Hi Eric, > >> > >> It seems that exfat is unhappy on 4k logical sector size devices: > > Thanks for your report! > > We have got same report from Christophe Vu-Brugier. And he sent us the > > patch(https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=ac8f77ef-f3144ef5-ac8efca0 > > -000babff24ad-8b7be88b031de920&q=1&e=0e9634f8-7ff9-4eb8-b5af-2316b62e9 > > 236&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fexfatprogs%2Fexfatprogs%2Fpull%2F164) > > to fix it yesterday.(Thanks Christophe!), I will check it today > > Oh, good timing! ;) > > gI'll try to look at that in more depth. It does seem to make everything work for me, and resolves a > couple other misunderstandings I may have had, and they seem to match with the spec. > > For example, I now see that boot sector signature does go at the end of 512 for the primary boot > sector, and at the end of $SECTOR_SIZE for the extended boot sector. Thanks for your check:) > > One other thing that I ran across is that fsck seems to validate an image against the sector size of > the device hosting the image rather than the sector size found in the boot sector, which seems like > another issue that will come up: > > # fsck/fsck.exfat /dev/sdb > exfatprogs version : 1.1.1 > /dev/sdb: clean. directories 1, files 0 > > # dd if=/dev/sdb of=test.img > 524288+0 records in > 524288+0 records out > 268435456 bytes (268 MB) copied, 1.27619 s, 210 MB/s > > # fsck.exfat test.img > exfatprogs version : 1.1.1 > checksum of boot region is not correct. 0, but expected 0x3ee721 boot region is corrupted. try to > restore the region from backup. Fix (y/N)? n > > Right now the utilities seem to assume that the device they're pointed at is always a block device, > and image files are problematic. Okay, Will fix it. > > Also, as an aside, it might be useful to have a "set sector size" commandline option at least for > testing, or to create 4k images that could be transferred to a 4k device. Agreed, We will add that option:) Thanks! > > Thanks, > -Eric
