Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:14:38 +0400
From:      "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>, Marius Strobl <marius@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: [CFC/CFT] large changes in the loader(8) code
Message-ID:  <5003F79E.1060706@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <5003F589.40603@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4FE9B01C.30306@yandex.ru> <5003EBAB.6030507@FreeBSD.org> <5003F39D.6030808@FreeBSD.org> <5003F589.40603@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig5F36F9C93BB298F6D6BA3735
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 16.07.2012 15:05, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>> 2. I am not sure if I like the approach of moving partition tasting c=
ode into
>>> common ZFS code (zfs.c).  On one hand, it now makes sense because the=
 new
>>> partition iteration code is machine-independent.  On the other hand, =
the reason
>>> that I added arch_zfs_probe method was to give platforms full control=
 over which
>>> partitions and in what order are probed.  It seems to be important fo=
r some of them.
>>> So, I like how your new partition interface makes it much easier to Z=
FS-probe
>>> partitions, but I would prefer to have that code in arch_zfs_probe im=
plementations
>>> rather than in zfs_probe_dev.
>>
>> From the other point of view, ZFS is not a just file system and it wor=
ks
>> directly with disks and partitions. And it seems to me this code will =
be common
>> for other architectures.
>=20
> Well, it seems that you haven't yet touched sparc64_zfs_probe.

Yes. It should work as before.
But if Marius can suggest how to change ofw_disk.c to get disk size and s=
ector size,
then i will be able to break something here :)

> If you'll find that you don't have to use any ugly hacks there, then go=
od.
> But my impression is that it would be easier to stick to the previous a=
pproach.

--=20
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov




--------------enig5F36F9C93BB298F6D6BA3735
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQA/eiAAoJEAHF6gQQyKF6pCkH/3x3pOypbVF48Rfed0jZ/uRI
LDUiwWg9ka9NrmX5DjiiNSYKNwQuZsk1EX6Gbv3HwHPHicpeOtes5HI8tlbXx2wo
9/FDJWQuKYo7Xz1AgvD3D026+xbmCXirw0mtYk7j3n9o5j8kuoqgtcsgmEFxjsR+
c8+074sLW1SGHaEjwjGgh9X4wSBpKbmlSEA7sCdc1Q0wX1P38IAjHUymKO7PDjCa
XGcGt6KXbmfPWHNVy82Tru12lq0q7fAAxNpTa7nlTmqFmMldhwiw+EbRDOX9OAA6
uNvJ0p4BSUl7uJyjpdjApZeNqXGqqFrJVZsBk0vZEMrglM7knTA5Oy9ZdyecNN4=
=Oj40
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig5F36F9C93BB298F6D6BA3735--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5003F79E.1060706>