From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Mar 17  3:17:44 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from freebsd.dk (freebsd.dk [212.242.42.178])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E01214F4F
	for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 03:17:41 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from sos@freebsd.dk)
Received: (from sos@localhost)
	by freebsd.dk (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA25664;
	Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:16:49 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from sos)
From: Søren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk>
Message-Id: <199903171116.MAA25664@freebsd.dk>
Subject: Re: How to add a new bootdevice to the new boot code ???
In-Reply-To: <199903171103.NAA13749@ceia.nordier.com> from Robert Nordier at "Mar 17, 1999  1: 3:33 pm"
To: rnordier@nordier.com (Robert Nordier)
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:16:49 +0100 (CET)
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

It seems Robert Nordier wrote:
> Søren Schmidt wrote:
>  
> > OK, easy enough, this is what I want to do:
> > 
> > Boot from an ata disk on major# 30, device name "ad", plain and simple.
> 
> I'd be inclined to handle this outside the boot code, by treating the
> passed in major# as describing the device rather than specifying
> the driver.
> 
> The point about the boot code is it is deliberately intended to be
> usable when completely out of sync with any actual kernel it is
> booting.  (I expect to be able to use 2.0 bootblocks with 4.0, and
> also that loader will be able to boot a 2.0 kernel.)
> 
> I assume at some stage that some stage the new driver will take over
> completely, and the older driver will disappear.  Before that, as
> people grow accustomed to thinking "ad" rather than "wd", it will

Not likely, as long as we need support for MFM/RLL/ESDI disk, wd.c
will stay around.

> probably make sense for the boot code to accept (say)
>
>     0:ad(0,a)boot/loader
> 
> rather than
> 
>     0:wd(0,a)boot/loader

That would be nice, could I please have that ??

> However, I'd *still* expect it to pass a major# of 0 rather than
> 30.  Why?  Because a 2.0 kernel knows only 0.  And if a 5.0 kernel
> knows only 30, it is -- at least -- in a position to know what
> 0 meant, and simply substitute one for the other (under the
> influence of a kernel configuration option, if necessary).

Hmm, wd should give 0 and ad should give 30, no AI please :)
I've tried fooling the driver to just use the 0 number,
but mount blows up, complaing that mounted root is different
from specified root...

-Søren


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message