[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Eliminating grub_size_t

From: Pavel Roskin
Subject: Re: Eliminating grub_size_t
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:23:33 -0400
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4)

Quoting Isaac Dupree <address@hidden>:

I mean that if, say, GRUB fails to read reiserfs, I'd like to be able to reproduce the problem in grub-fstest even if I'm compiling it on x86_64.

In this case, so we're producing a 32-bit, pc grub image.  To have a
similar effect in grub-fstest, we'd need to define grub_size_t to be a
32-bit quantity when compiling that too, am I right?  Is there any
reason not to just have grub-fstest try to imitate whatever the
bootloader image decides it needs?  So if some platform requires a
64-bit bootloader and we're running on 32-bits, we may need a 64-bit
grub_size_t in both places (well, this is maybe not likely to work
entirely, but GCC can generate the operations -- or we could just use
32 bit for grub-fstest then if we think it's the least-nonsensical
thing to do in that hypothetical situation).

I don't think we need 64-bit grub_size_t anywhere, even in 64-bit bootloaders.

Pavel Roskin

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]