Hello Pedro,
Le Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 10:32:51PM +0000, Pedro Falcato a écrit :
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 9:21 PM <tlaro...@polynum.com> wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/BlockIo.c
> > b/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/BlockIo.c
> > index cf2d6b4cda..c0c694be55 100644
> > --- a/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/BlockIo.c
> > +++ b/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/BlockIo.c
> > @@ -133,6 +133,20 @@ EmuBlockIoOpenDevice (
> >
> > ioctl (Private->fd, DKIOCGETMAXBLOCKCOUNTWRITE,
> > &Private->Media->OptimalTransferLengthGranularity);
> > }
> > + #elif _NETBSD_SOURCE
> > + {
> > + u_int BlockSize;
> >
> Hi,
>
> Again, thanks for the patches. Please send them in the way I kind of
> described in my other reply.
>
> s/u_int/UINT/
>
> + off_t DiskSize;
> >
> I think this off_t is fine, per the other off_t usages, I don't know if the
> maintainers agree.
>
> > +
> > + if (ioctl (Private->fd, DIOCGSECTORSIZE, &BlockSize) == 0) {
> > + Private->Media->BlockSize = BlockSize;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (ioctl (Private->fd, DIOCGMEDIASIZE, &DiskSize) == 0) {
> > + Private->NumberOfBlocks = DivU64x32 (DiskSize,
> > (UINT32)BlockSize);
> > + Private->Media->LastBlock = Private->NumberOfBlocks - 1;
> > + }
> > + }
> > #else
> > {
> > size_t BlockSize;
> >
>
>
> > diff --git a/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/Host.c b/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/Host.c
> > index 38c01c84af..c505300129 100644
> > --- a/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/Host.c
> > +++ b/EmulatorPkg/Unix/Host/Host.c
> > @@ -12,6 +12,12 @@ SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause-Patent
> > #define MAP_ANONYMOUS MAP_ANON
> > #endif
> >
> > +#ifdef _NETBSD_SOURCE
> > +#define MAP_ANON_FD_ (-1)
> > +#else
> > +#define MAP_ANON_FD_ (0)
> > +#endif
> >
> Would there be a harm if we just passed -1 everywhere? It's a bit odd
> NetBSD explicitly requires this, but AFAIK implementations
> either EINVAL on fd != -1 or take whatever since it's anon. The main
> implementations (Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, macOS) seem to
> agree that passing -1 should be safe everywhere (in fact, it's pretty funny
> that all BSD-derived implementations agree with the fd = -1 thing, but I
> digress).
Since MAP_ANON is not specified by POSIX1, I tend to think that what is
not in POSIX should be explicitely set in the code.
So if other OSes (with which edk2 is used) agree on (-1), my personal
taste would be to keep at least the define macro:
#define MAP_ANON_FD_ (-1)
as an indication that the definition is not standard (so that someone
with a system choking on this, could easily spot the culprit). (The
trailing underscore is because leading ones shall be reserved for
standard or system implementation, and the trailing is a way to indicate
that the macro is somehow local. Is there a convention for this in
EDK2?)
Best,
--
Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
http://www.kergis.com/
http://kertex.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#96544): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/96544
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/95182515/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
