Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] multiboot: Change multiboot_info from array of bytes to a C struct

[Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>]

Am 29.01.2018 um 19:21 hat Anatol Pomozov geschrieben:
> Hi
> 
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 6:49 AM, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Am 13.10.2017 um 01:54 hat Anatol Pomozov geschrieben:
> >> Using C structs makes the code more readable and prevents type conversion
> >> errors.
> >>
> >> Borrow multiboot1 header from GRUB project.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Anatol Pomozov <anatol.pomozov@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>  hw/i386/multiboot.c         | 124 +++++++++------------
> >>  hw/i386/multiboot_header.h  | 254 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  tests/multiboot/mmap.c      |  14 +--
> >>  tests/multiboot/mmap.out    |  10 ++
> >>  tests/multiboot/modules.c   |  12 ++-
> >>  tests/multiboot/modules.out |  10 ++
> >>  tests/multiboot/multiboot.h |  66 ------------
> >>  7 files changed, 339 insertions(+), 151 deletions(-)
> >>  create mode 100644 hw/i386/multiboot_header.h
> >>  delete mode 100644 tests/multiboot/multiboot.h
> >
> > This is a good change in general. However, I'm not sure if we should
> > really replace the header used in the tests. After all, the tests also
> > test whether things are at the right place, and if there is an error in
> > the header file, we can only catch it if the tests keep using their own
> > definitions.
> 
> The added multibooh.h is from GRUB - the developers of multiboot. I
> think we can trust it. Having a single header will make future tests
> maintainence easier.
> 
> But if you feel strongly that qemu tests should use it's own version
> of multiboot header then I can add it back.

No, I don't feel strongly, just wanted to mention that there is an
advantage of having a separate header in case you had not thought of it.
The decision is up to you.

Kevin