On Sunday 09 July 2006 23:37, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> Well, if you consider the total_sectors a private variable, and you
> want to have accessor functions for accessing it, then I can
> understand your point a bit, but such things will make the kernel
> bigger and I thought it was a goal to keep i
At Sun, 9 Jul 2006 15:29:17 +0200,
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>
> On Sunday 09 July 2006 14:01, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > I don't see anything like that in the code when I grep for
> > total_sectors. The only code that is using total_sectors as the size
> > of the disk is the grub_disk_check_range(
Maybe Jeroen (and me) thinks that a 'disk' and 'partition' does not
differ, as there can be some strange disk with filesystem directly on it
(some flash memories, etc.) and also partitions containing another
partitions. Standard terminology typically defines 'disk' as "root"
partition. I.e. its pa
On Sunday 09 July 2006 14:01, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> I don't see anything like that in the code when I grep for
> total_sectors. The only code that is using total_sectors as the size
> of the disk is the grub_disk_check_range(), but that function is also
> interested in whether the offset/size fit
At Sun, 9 Jul 2006 03:11:33 +0200,
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > > No. When you open something, you usually have no interest in the size.
> >
> > Yes, but those unusual places that do have interest in it want to know
> > the size of the partition and not the size of the disk that contains
> > the p
On Sunday 09 July 2006 01:35, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> The illogical thing for me is: You ask to open a partition, you get
> back a structure that has half the properties of the partition, and
> the other half has the properties of the disk the partition is on.
I don't see this. When you open a par
At Sat, 8 Jul 2006 23:10:56 +0200,
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>
> 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 illo
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 informa
At Sat, 8 Jul 2006 18:07:44 +0200,
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>
> Hi Jeroen,
>
> On Wednesday 05 July 2006 22:54, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > +
> > + disk->total_sectors = grub_partition_get_len (disk->partition);
> > +}
>
> But I don't agree with this part. The member "total_sectors" must
Hi Jeroen,
On Wednesday 05 July 2006 22:54, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
>if (p)
> -disk->partition = grub_partition_probe (disk, p + 1);
> +{
> + disk->partition = grub_partition_probe (disk, p + 1);
> + if (! disk->partition)
> + {
> + grub_error (GRUB_ERR_UNKNOWN_DEVICE
Hi,
When we open a partition grub_disk_open() sets disk->total_sectors to
the size of the disk, not the size of the partition. We also don't
check whether we grub_partition_probe() actually finds a
partition. See the patch below.
Jeroen Dekkers
2006-07-05 Jeroen Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11 matches
Mail list logo
