From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6F6BCCFA18 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 07:44:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vIj2R-0002Mq-Hy; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 02:43:39 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vIj2P-0002JJ-83 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 02:43:37 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vIj2N-0005sb-Ie for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 02:43:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1762847014; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Kn+uPIo+fXfvkXVA00Z+HGdj2mK8aMjFPIAB7ZovXZg=; b=iTo3p0iG1qeOd57/34TVoSv9TxJQ3QDDUVvOzf31n8HxijXwLHdII4eNr5C4GLNgOE73LW iDTKeHlI4onbrRapc1ll5vdcteJ/Nf+19AKk39bzCLxeH9Nwtav0zb1cF0FOfOqUkYDHvf Ag7ACt8cjkFIhm42Mpb4jhq+2ARBV+M= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-581-Rt0ld-PjOmqyJgaFLI3pzw-1; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 02:43:31 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Rt0ld-PjOmqyJgaFLI3pzw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: Rt0ld-PjOmqyJgaFLI3pzw_1762847010 Received: from mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.111]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43B361800650; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 07:43:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.45.242.18]) by mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92F541800451; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 07:43:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E8A3621E6A27; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:43:26 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Kevin Wolf Cc: BALATON Zoltan , =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Chigot , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, hreitz@redhat.com, eblake@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] vvfat: introduce partitioned option In-Reply-To: (Kevin Wolf's message of "Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:08:10 +0100") References: <20251107145327.539481-1-chigot@adacore.com> <20251107145327.539481-2-chigot@adacore.com> <878qgenqum.fsf@pond.sub.org> <757f66d0-625c-9d1b-5090-3d5210903173@eik.bme.hu> <87346mkos9.fsf@pond.sub.org> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:43:26 +0100 Message-ID: <87ecq5f201.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.111 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Kevin Wolf writes: > Am 10.11.2025 um 14:20 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben: >> BALATON Zoltan writes: >>=20 >> > On Mon, 10 Nov 2025, Cl=C3=A9ment Chigot wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 11:07=E2=80=AFAM Markus Armbruster wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Cl=C3=A9ment Chigot writes: >> >>> >> >>>> This option tells whether a hard disk should be partitioned or not.= It >> >>>> defaults to true and have the prime effect of preventing a master b= oot >> >>>> record (MBR) to be initialized. >> >>>> >> >>>> This is useful as some operating system (QNX, Rtems) don't >> >>>> recognized FAT mounted disks (especially SD cards) if a MBR is pres= ent. >> >>>> >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Cl=C3=A9ment Chigot [...] >> >>> Not sure I like "partitioned". Is a disk with an MBR and a partition >> >>> table contraining a single partition partitioned? Call it "mbr"? >> >> >> >> It used to be called "mbr/no-mbr" but Kevin suggested renaming it in >> >> V1. Honestly I'm fine with both options: >> >> - Technically, the option prevents MBR which has a side effect for >> >> preventing partition tables >>=20 >> Yes, because the partition table is part of the MBR. I'd rather name >> the option after the entire thing it controls, not one of its parts. >>=20 >> >> - Even it has a single partition, I think it makes sense to call a >> >> disk "partitioned" as long as it has a partition table >> >> >> >> But I'm not that familiar with disk formats, etc. I'll let you decide >> >> with Kevin, which one you prefer. >>=20 >> Kevin is the maintainer, I just serve as advisor here. > > I figured that the meaning of "partitioned" is easier to understand for > a casual user than having or not having an MBR ("I don't want to boot > from this disk, why would I care about a boot record?"). Fair point. Possible counter-points: * The default is almost always right for the casual user. The exception, as far as I understand, is certain guest OSes refuse to play ball with certain devices when they have an MBR. * The configuration interface isn't exactly casual-user-friendly to begin with. @fat-type, what's that, and why do I care? @floppy, what's that, and why do I care? Anyway, you decide. > But if people think that "mbr" is better, that's fine with me. > > The only thing I really didn't want is the negative "no-mbr" and the > double negation in "no-mbr=3Doff" that comes with it. Yes, negative names should definitely be avoided for boolean options. [...]