2009/7/29 Javier Martín <lordhab...@gmail.com>: > Robert Millan escribió: >> First of all, please don't call them far pointers. They're an i8086 legacy >> cruft, which have nothing to do with far or close really (although we seem to >> have some code that makes this reference already). > So... how do we call them? I am an utter failure at making up sensible > names. > grub_i386_realmode_ptr_t >> Is there a usefulness in this `raw_bits' member? It doesn't have any >> real meaning, as it doesn't correspond to an actual address. > Mainly, the possibility of checking equality against a particular bit > pattern without using another instance of the structure/union. Also, > some code might want to still use the raw bits for some reason, instead > of either the nearly-opaque handling described above or the more > detailed view provided by the inner structure. raw_bits don't seem very useful and using them is error-prone. E.g. two pointers may reffer to same address even having different raw_bits. So I would prefer not to include them unless there are real examples when it's useful
> OK then... That means the code will have to move from i386/pc/memory.h > to i386/memory.h. And what about x86_64? Put a memory.h in x86_64/memory.h which will include i386/memory.h -- Regards Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko Personal git repository: http://repo.or.cz/w/grub2/phcoder.git _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
