[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Design] nested partitions: Unify grub_partition and grub_disk

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: [Design] nested partitions: Unify grub_partition and grub_disk
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:00:37 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:58:05PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
> Ping. Is it ok for me to implement it this way?

I'd really like it if Okuji could give his impression on this one, if

> phcoder wrote:
>> I forgot to speak about another question: partition naming. I see 2  
>> possibilities
>> 1) purely numeric unified naming scheme. It means that
>> (hd0,1,a) becomes (hd0,1,1)
>> On one hand mixed number-letter scheme is similar to what freebsd uses  
>> but on the other hand numerical scheme is versatile and allows 
>> unlimited nestedness. And I don't see why we would use a scheme 
>> specific to one of many supported OSes.
>> 2) Every partition map is allowed to pick the name that it likes as 
>> long as it contains no comma. In this way we would need to keep  
>> partition-name parsing functions in partitition map modules. It means  
>> that this code would be duplicated. But this scheme is better in the  
>> cases when partition map has no numbering scheme but instead has labels 
>> attached to partitions. But in this case IMO search command should be  
>> used find the partition
>> I personally would prefer the first way
>>> Also an interesting question is how would "has_partitions" field be
>>> handled in this scheme.
>> Just ignored. It's actually used only to optimise some code out based 
>> on the assumption that some media has no partitions. Performance gain 
>> is negligible but if this assumption doesn't hold true grub won't be 
>> able to access the partitions which are really here. Famous example is 
>> a cdrom. Most people would assume that cdrom has no partitions. But on  
>> powerpc bootable cdroms use APM
> -- 
> Regards
> Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> address@hidden

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

reply via email to

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