Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: THEend8_
COMP3301 Assignment 3 Marksheet 25 Marks (25%)
$Revision: 477 $
Surname First Name Student ID Session/Date Marker Initials
Reflection
Criteria Excellent (eX) Good (gX) Satisfactory (sX) Weak (wX) Poor (pX)
Reflection
• (e1) Reflection is clear
and concise and de-
scribes the steps taken.
If a flow chart is in-
cluded, it must be clear
about the steps taken.
• (e2) An error in the code
was clearly identified and
fixed
• (e3) Analysis is in-depth
and identifies all relevant
aspects of the error
• (e4) Demonstrates
strong command of
debugging methods and
tools
• (g1) Reflection is not
clear but mostly de-
scribes the steps taken.
Or a flow chart is in-
cluded and is clear about
the steps taken.
• (g2) An error in the
code was clearly identi-
fied and a fix attempted
• (g3) Analysis is in-depth
and identifies most rele-
vant aspects of the er-
ror, but may have missed
some details
• (g4) Demonstrates us-
age of debugging meth-
ods and/or tools
• (g5) Fix is sensible and
specific, but may contain
minor errors or be incom-
plete
• (s1) An error in the code
was identified
• (s2) Basic analysis was
done, but some major
details may have been
missed
• (s3) A fix was at-
tempted, but may con-
tain errors or be incom-
plete
• (p1) Reflection is given
but is poorly worded and
is not clear. Or a flow
chart is included but it is
not clear.
• (p2) Some attempt at
analysis
• (p3) A fix may or may
not be attempted
• (z1) Reflection is not
given or is not under-
standable
• (z2) No clear error iden-
tified
• (z3) Analysis not at-
tempted
• (z4) No evidence of de-
bugging methods or tool
usage
• (z5) No attempt to fix
/3 3 – 2 – 1 0
Writing Style
• (e1) Clear written En-
glish with appropriate
word choices
• (s1) Difficult to under-
stand, but some mean-
ing evident. Signifi-
cant errors in grammar
or spelling.
• (z1) No response pro-
vided, or was unintelligi-
ble.
/2 2 – 1 – – 0
QCOW Functionality
Criteria Excellent (eX) Good (gX) Satisfactory (sX) Weak (wX) Poor (pX)
Code Style
• (e1) No style errors
were detected in lines
changed or added.
• (s1) Code was submit-
ted, and some lines of
code contained no style
violations.
• (z1) No code submit-
ted, or every line sub-
mitted contains style vi-
olations.
/2 2 – 1 – – 0
Read/Write Support
• (e1) Can obtain logi-
cal offset from disk la-
bels for both the raw
disk and partition in the
disk
• (e2) Can read all re-
quire metadata from
the backing file
• (e3) Able to allocate
L2 tables and Guest
clusters on a write()
call that will never over-
write other clusters
• (e4) Able to read data
from already allocated
clusters and return 0s
on non-allocated clus-
ters
• (e5) Able to write data
to clusters at the cor-
rect offset for any given
sector.
• (e6) Able to success-
fully mount to and write
to a file system stored
in a qcow file
• (g1) Can obtain logi-
cal offset from disk la-
bels for at least the raw
disk
• (g2) Can read all re-
quired metadata from
the backing file
• (g3) Able to allocate
L2 tables and Guest
clusters on a write()
call but may overwrite
other clusters
• (g4) Able to read data
from already allocated
clusters and return 0s
on non-allocated clus-
ters
• (g5) Able to write data
to clusters but may not
correctly map sectors.
• (s1) Can obtain logi-
cal offset form disk la-
bels for at least the raw
disk