On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 12:05 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > > I'm fine with the split, but please use something more descriptive than > > U16, U32 and U64. Maybe fs_to_cpu16() etc. > > > U* was here before me but here is a patch w/o them
Sorry, I didn't realize that. Then maybe it would be better to apply that part separately after the split. Please define macros with arguments. It makes the code more readable. Please don't introduce excessively long lines in *.rmk files. Newlines are cheap :-) I don't think we should rename "byte_order" to "unused". Just because we doesn't use it now to determine the endianess, it doesn't mean that the field becomes meaningless. We may want to check it in the future. There are other fields in the superblock that we don't use, such as "flags", yet we don't rename them to "unusedN". Apart from that, I'm fine with the patch. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
