On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:06:08PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 23/04/2012 00:21 Marius Strobl said the following:
> > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 06:37:54PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> I am particularly interested in reviews of my attempt to make ZFS boot support
> >> arch-independent. The arches, of course, would have to add some code to make
> >> use of that support. Currently I only enabled it for x86.
> > I can't say much about these patches as a whole as they are rather
> > big and I'm not aware of all the details of ZFS. However, one bit that
> > makes the current implementation x86-specific is zfs_dev_init(). If
> > you could move it to the MD part in the course of these patches that
> > would be great.
> I have arranged this in my WIP version of the patch, which I hope to share soon.
> Need to work out some unrelated details.
> > If you could also take the second patch in PR 165025
> > into account, which I plan to commit once the issue with the current
> > ofw_disk.c are properly solved, that would be great.
> Thank you for the heads up.
> Since I also hope to commit my patch rather soon, I would also appreciate if you
> keep my changes in mind :-)
> In fact, I would like to ask you if it would make sense to postpone the patch
> from the PR until my patch is committed. That should make some things easier to
> do (e.g. MD zfs_dev_init), but on the other hand some things would become different.
> Either way, one of the patches would have to be rebased on top of the other.
Given that you certainly have a well better knowledge of ZFS, it
would be great if we could do it the other way around, i.e. commit
the sparc64 support first and then your patch after adapting
whatever you have in mind with things becoming different. In other
words, I'm basically ready to commit the following patch. As for
zfs_dev_init() this just wraps it in #if defined(__amd64__) ||
defined(__i386__) in zfs.c for now.