Re: [PATCH] 64 bit scsi read/write

From: Alexander Griesser (tuxx@aon.at)
Date: Sat Jul 21 2001 - 14:18:31 EST


On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 09:08:41PM -0400, you wrote:
> > The only requirement here is that the checksum be correct. And sure,
> > that's not a hard guarantee because, on average, you will get a good
> > checksum for bad data once every 4 billion power events that mess up
> > the final superblock transfer. Let me see, if that happens once a year,
> In a tree-structured filesystem, checksums on everything would only
> cost you space similar to the number of pointers you have. Whenever
> a non-leaf node points to a child, it can hold a checksum for that
> child as well.
> This gives a very reliable way to spot filesystem errors, including
> corrupt data blocks.

Hmm, maybe this is crap, but:
If the checksum-calculation for one node fails, wouldn't that mean, that
the data in this node, is not to be trusted? therefore also the checksum
of this node could be corrupted and so the node, 2 hops away, can't be
validated with 100% certitude...

regards, alexx

-- 
|   .-.   | Alexander Griesser <tuxx@aon.at> -=- ICQ:63180135 |  .''`. |
|   /v\   |  http://www.tuxx-home.at -=- Linux Version 2.4.7  | : :' : |
| /(   )\ |  FAQ zu at.linux:  http://alfie.ist.org/LinuxFAQ  | `. `'  |
|  ^^ ^^  `---------------------------------------------------   `-   |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 23 2001 - 21:00:15 EST