Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

nanobsd: Rename code_slice to code_partition
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by senguptaangshuman17_gmail.com on Wed, Aug 19, 10:21 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F170153030: D58962.id185386.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 4:15 PM
F170072827: D58962.id185001.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 10:44 AM
F170057602: D58962.id.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 9:35 AM
F170029835: D58962.id184327.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 7:27 AM
F170027832: D58962.id185266.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 7:18 AM
F170009589: D58962.id184836.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 6:00 AM
F170004016: D58962.id184836.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 5:46 AM
F169997297: D58962.id184462.diff
Thu, Sep 3, 5:26 AM
Subscribers

Details

Reviewers
jlduran
jrm
ashish
Summary

Move the create_code_slice selection logic into a
create_code_partition() wrapper in legacy.sh and update
embedded/common to provide the same entry point.

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped
Build Status
Buildable 76124
Build 73007: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

I don't think we should touch anything legacy, or at least avoid it as much as possible. In this context embedded can be considered legacy.

I don't think we should touch anything legacy, or at least avoid it as much as possible. In this context embedded can be considered legacy.

I didn't get what is to be done. Can you clarify it a bit further?
Thankyou

I don't think we should touch anything legacy, or at least avoid it as much as possible. In this context embedded can be considered legacy.

I didn't get what is to be done. Can you clarify it a bit further?
Thankyou

I think we can leave tools/tools/nanobsd/embedded/common unchanged (reimagined embedded SoCs will be handled by default.sh as well).
Also, I think _create_code_slice() currently produces a legacy NanoBSD image equivalent to create_code_slice(), I wonder if we can use just one legacy function.

I don't think we should touch anything legacy, or at least avoid it as much as possible. In this context embedded can be considered legacy.

I didn't get what is to be done. Can you clarify it a bit further?
Thankyou

I think we can leave tools/tools/nanobsd/embedded/common unchanged (reimagined embedded SoCs will be handled by default.sh as well).
Also, I think _create_code_slice() currently produces a legacy NanoBSD image equivalent to create_code_slice(), I wonder if we can use just one legacy function.

for unifying create_code_slice in legacy which path to keep the mdconfig or mkimg?

I don't think we should touch anything legacy, or at least avoid it as much as possible. In this context embedded can be considered legacy.

I didn't get what is to be done. Can you clarify it a bit further?
Thankyou

I think we can leave tools/tools/nanobsd/embedded/common unchanged (reimagined embedded SoCs will be handled by default.sh as well).
Also, I think _create_code_slice() currently produces a legacy NanoBSD image equivalent to create_code_slice(), I wonder if we can use just one legacy function.

for unifying create_code_slice in legacy which path to keep the mdconfig or mkimg?

Note that I'm not suggesting this unification here in this review. It is just something to keep in mind, that could be done.