On Saturday 08 July 2006 22:39, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > But it's a little bit illogical that the size you get from the same > disk structure isn't the size of the partition, but the size of > something else.
It is not illogical from my point of view. The disk structure should describe the information on a disk but not on a partition. Your way looks illogical to me. > It's also not really useful: if you're opening a > partition, your are interested in the size of the partition most of > the time, not the size of the disk the partition is on. No. When you open something, you usually have no interest in the size. > The AFFS code > already assumes that the total_sectors is the size of the partition > and the blocklist code does that too, if you want to allow to read a > blocklist from a partition. blocklist does not. I fixed this bug some weeks ago. I don't remember about AFFS. I haven't proofread the code carefully. > Not having total_sectors the size of the partition also makes it > impossible to write generic code for both disks and > partitions. Everytime you want to get the size of a device, you've to > check whether the device is a disk or a partition. This will enlarge > the code unnecessary. Tell me why you need to know the size. The range check is automatically done by the disk interface, so you won't have to deal with such a check in the filesystem code. > So I don't really see why total_sectors should be the size of the disk > the partition is on instead of the size of the partition. Because the disk structure is for disks, and the partition structure is for partitions. Overwriting total_sectors in a disk means that you only lose information. If your concern is only the conditional that checks if a disk contains a partition or not, you can write a functional such as grub_device_get_size. Okuji _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
