search for: fat_entri

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "fat_entri".

Did you mean: fat_entry
2018 Oct 28
0
[PATCH nbdkit 4/4] Add floppy plugin.
...t; PRIu64 " data clusters, " + "largest cluster number %" PRIu32 ", " + "%" PRIu64 " bytes", + floppy->data_clusters, + cluster-1, + floppy->data_size); + + floppy->fat_entries = floppy->data_clusters + 2; + floppy->fat_clusters = DIV_ROUND_UP (floppy->fat_entries * 4, CLUSTER_SIZE); + + nbdkit_debug ("floppy: %" PRIu64 " FAT entries", floppy->fat_entries); + + /* We can now decide where we will place the FATs and data region on disk....
2016 Feb 25
0
[PATCH 1/5] fat: fix minfatsize for large FAT32
...fact that it is created when formatting the FAT32 volume. Since the minimal space that can be allocated in FAT is one entire Cluster, then the Root Directory being created will occupy one Cluster: 64 Sectors in our example. _ The first Cluster of the Data Area corresponds to FAT_entry #2 (as FAT_entries #0 and #1 are reserved). The above values are the ones we are taking as "known". Now, for simplicity, I am going to take the value of Sectors_per_FAT that Ridgecrop's Large FAT32 formatting tool used for our example: Sectors per FAT: 23843 With this Sectors_per_FAT value, the...
2018 Oct 28
6
[PATCH nbdkit 0/4] Add floppy plugin.
Add nbdkit-floppy-plugin, “inspired” by qemu's VVFAT driver, but without the ability to handle writes. The implementation is pretty complete, supporting FAT32, LFNs, volume labels, timestamps, etc, and it passes both ‘make check’ and ‘make check-valgrind’. Usage is simple; to serve the current directory: $ nbdkit floppy . Then using guestfish (or any NBD client): $ guestfish --ro
2016 Feb 25
3
[PATCH 1/5] fat: fix minfatsize for large FAT32
Hi Ady, On 2016.02.25 02:08, Ady via Syslinux wrote: > There is an "extra" sector, in comparison to... what exactly? Sorry if I wasn't clear. I think I implied that the Large FAT32 fat size had an extra sector compared to minfatsize, when of course I meant the opposite (the Large FAT32 has one less sector than the minfatsize computed by the unpatched code, hence the check