Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 08 May 2012 10:14:43 +0300
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
Subject:   Re: [review request] zfsboot/zfsloader: support accessing filesystems within a pool
Message-ID:  <4FA8C7E3.8070006@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <201205071343.45955.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <4F8999D2.1080902@FreeBSD.org> <201205070953.04032.jhb@freebsd.org> <4FA7E069.8020208@FreeBSD.org> <201205071343.45955.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 07/05/2012 20:43 John Baldwin said the following:
> On Monday, May 07, 2012 10:47:05 am Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 07/05/2012 16:53 John Baldwin said the following:
[snip]
>> What do you think about the -LOCORE- change that Bruce inspired?
> 
> In general I think this looks good.  I have only one suggestion.  In other
> code (e.g. the genassym constants in the kernel) where we define constants
> for field offsets, we make the constant be the uppercase name of the field
> itself (e.g. TD_PCB for offsetof(struct thread, td_pcb)).  I would rather
> do that here as well.  In this case the field names do not have a prefix,
> but let's just use a BA_ prefix for members of 'bootargs'.  BI_SIZE is
> already correct, but this would mean renaming HT_OFF to BA_HOWTO, BF_OFF to
> BA_BOOTFLAGS, and BI_OFF to BA_BOOTINFO.

OK, doing this.

> I think you can probably leave BA_SIZE as-is.

I see that i386 genassym has a few different styles for sizeof constants:
ABBRSIZE
FULL_NAME_SIZE
ABBR_SIZEOF

FULL_NAME_SIZE looked the most appealing to me (and seems to be the most
common), so I decided to change BA_SIZE to BOOTARGS_SIZE.
I hope that this makes sense and I am not starting a bikeshed :-)

>>> Also, at some point we could use a genassym.c file ala the kernel builds to generate
>>> some of the constants in bootargs.h instead (e.g. the offsets of fields within
>>> structures, and BA_SIZE, though we probably want to ensure that BA_SIZE never
>>> changes).
>>
>> The genassym approach sounds good, but, indeed - later :)
> 
> Yes, that can wait.  I think it would not be very hard to do however.  All
> you really need is access to sys/kern/genassym.sh and nm.
> 


-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FA8C7E3.8070006>