On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 17:36 +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 18/04/2012 17:22 Ian Lepore said the following: > > YES! A size field (preferably as the first field in the struct) along > > with a flag to indicate that it's a new-style boot info struct that > > starts with a size field, will allow future changes without a lot of > > drama. It can allow code that has to deal with the struct without > > interpretting it (such as trampoline code that has to copy it to a new > > stack or memory area as part of loading the kernel) to be immune to > > future changes. > > Yeah, placing the new field at front would immediately break compatibility and > even access to the flags field :-) >
Code would only assume the new field was at the front of the struct if the new flag is set, otherwise it would use the historical struct layout. -- Ian _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
