On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:30:36AM -0800, Paul Dagnelie wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 3:03 AM Daniel Kiper <dki...@net-space.pl> wrote: > > > > Why "root" not "boot"? > That was a typo on my part; the code uses grub_guess_root_device to > find the devices backing the default grub directory, but in most > configurations, this should attempt to locate the boot filesystem > instead of the root. I was uncertain of a better way to consistently > determine the boot filesystem, and this portion of the code was copied > from another GRUB patch > (https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Factory/grub2/grub2-grubenv-in-btrfs-header.patch?expand=1). > > > Yes, please split the patch into smaller patches. Please do one logical > > change per patch. > > > > I quickly went through the patch and pointed things which I spotted at > > first sight. I will provide more comments when you split the patch into > > separate patches. > > > > Next time please CC following people too: javi...@redhat.com, > > maciej.pijanow...@3mdeb.com and piotr.k...@3mdeb.com. > Understood! I will post an updated version hopefully today or tomorrow. > > > > > I think that you can drop parenthesis here. And please use NULL instead of > > 0. > Will do. In general, this was one of my questions about writing new > code in this code base. There are several things where I decided to go > with consistency with surrounding code instead of what would commonly > be preferred in modern coding standards or by the style guide (see > also, the block comment style you mentioned further down). Is there a > preference in this codebase against consistency when other > considerations are also relevant?
Please try to be consistent with what you see in a given file. Except some things which are not inline with grub-dev doc. In these cases stick to grub-dev. Daniel _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
