On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:58:16 PM UTC-5, Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 9:15 PM Waldek Kozaczuk <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> One of the objectives listed above: 
>> "The key building block to achieve it should be an improved ROFS intended 
>> as a default filesystem to load code from"
>> is directly related to this. Is it a right move in right direction? I 
>> wonder what your thoughts are. 
>>
>>
> If I understand you correctly, you want instead of the "ramdisk" located 
> inside the kernel (bootfs) and written into a ramfs during boot, to have a 
> ROFS partition (or even not an official partition, just an area on the disk 
> following the kernel). I am not saying I'm opposed to this, but I'm also 
> not sure you'd see major gains from it. Is the default bootfs big enough to 
> worry about if we fix https://github.com/cloudius-systems/osv/issues/980 
> (and note that if your image doesn't use ZFS, it wouldn't even have that 
> cpiod.so in the bootfs).
>
The major gain is that the kernel will be free on any ZFS code unless one 
needs ZFS in which case the ZFS code  as a shared library (or other tools 
like mkfs.so, cpiod.so, etc) would get loaded from ROFS partition. Same 
eventually could apply to NFS.    

>
> What I still don't understand, though, is how any of these changes will 
> allow you to move kernel option parsing from the kernel to an external 
> program. Today parse_options() is called very early, because we want to 
> support options like "--verbose", "--nomount" and many more, which should 
> take effect early - before any filesystem is mounted. I'm not saying fixing 
> this is impossible, it's just that I think that option parsing is simple 
> enough to rewrite not use boost program options - if you saw that this 
> alone can save us half a megabyte (if I remember correctly what you wrote). 
>
> That is not what I am trying to say. As you are pointing out it is best to 
simply rewrite parse_options() by using getopt_long() instead of program 
options. And I agree with this. The is however second part in loader.cc 
that uses program options - to parse command line with possible runscript 
option (most of commands.cc). That is what I propose to extract as an 
optional commands.so that could be loaded from ROFS as well. I hope it 
makes it clear.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OSv 
Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to