Bug 1046577 - incorrectly creates fat16 EFI System partitions
Summary: incorrectly creates fat16 EFI System partitions
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: python-blivet
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Brian Lane
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-12-26 07:46 UTC by Chris Murphy
Modified: 2016-04-18 18:10 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-10-08 23:01:55 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Chris Murphy 2013-12-26 07:46:58 UTC
Description of problem: Fedora 20 install media creates fat16 EFI System partitions. They should be FAT32.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
python-blivet-0.23.9-1.fc20.noarch
anaconda-20.25.15-1.fc20.x86_64

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Do a UEFI install of Fedora

Actual results:
os-prober and parted report the ESP is fat16. anaconda.program.log shows mkdosfs is called without -F32 arg.

Expected results:

ESP should be fat32.

Additional info:
UEFI spec for some time has specified fat32 for system partitions, and fat12/fat16 for removeable media.

Comment 1 Rod Smith 2013-12-26 19:37:30 UTC
Note that some EFIs have bugs that cause them to misbehave on FAT32 ESPs that are smaller than 512MiB (note: MiB, not MB) in size. My recommendation to individuals has become to create an ESP that's 550MiB in size, since this is big enough to trigger mkdosfs to create a FAT32 filesystem by default, even if there's MiB-vs-MB confusion. A similar size might be a good choice for Anaconda, at least whenever practical.

Comment 2 Brian Lane 2014-01-06 18:09:15 UTC
I think we're better off letting mkdosfs handle this based on size.

Is there an actual problem, eg. not booting?

Comment 3 Adam Williamson 2014-01-27 21:13:19 UTC
(In reply to Brian C. Lane from comment #2)
> I think we're better off letting mkdosfs handle this based on size.
> 
> Is there an actual problem, eg. not booting?

You could write a UEFI firmware that did this:

* Works with FAT12/FAT16 ESPs on removable media, but not FAT32 ESPs
* Works with FAT32 ESPs on permanent media, but not FAT12/FAT16 ESPs

and it'd be spec compliant. And as we all know, that means some jackass somewhere is going to do it. I don't think we've come across a real world case *yet*, though.

Comment 4 Chris Murphy 2014-06-09 19:33:48 UTC
Since the spec says "EFI encompasses the use of FAT32 for a system partition, and FAT12 or FAT16 for removable media" it's conceivable firmware will implement FAT12 and FAT32 but not FAT16; or FAT16 and FAT32 but not FAT12. So yes this looks like it could be a real problem.

The spec also says: "For more information about the EFI file system and file image format, visit the web site from which this document was obtained." and "The rules defining the relationship between media size and FAT variants is defined in the specification for the EFI
file system." Yet I'm unable to find this specification for the EFI file system anywhere.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.