Re: Eliminating grub_size_t

[Pavel Roskin]

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.

--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin