Re: git: 0df5f65908dd - main - reboot: Implement zfs support
- In reply to: Jessica Clarke : "Re: git: 0df5f65908dd - main - reboot: Implement zfs support"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 02:28:10 UTC
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024, 6:10 PM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 12 Feb 2024, at 18:53, Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > > The branch main has been updated by imp: > > > > URL: > https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=0df5f65908dd1913212535e6c4dd4c73ce19c305 > > > > commit 0df5f65908dd1913212535e6c4dd4c73ce19c305 > > Author: Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org> > > AuthorDate: 2024-02-12 18:45:37 +0000 > > Commit: Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org> > > CommitDate: 2024-02-12 18:45:37 +0000 > > > > reboot: Implement zfs support > > > > Implement full support for ZFS -k support. For ZFS, we have to set a > > property that gets cleared by the boot loaeder for whether or not to > > process nextboot.conf. Do this using system("zfsbootcfg..." rather > than > > coding the small subset of that program inline to avoid CDDL > > contamination of reboot and the complications of disabling CDDL and/or > > ZFS. The few bytes needed to implement reboot for systems with zfs is > > not worth saving for systems w/o ZFS. > > Can we at least use posix_spawn rather than system? The asprintf+system > combo may in practice be safe, especially given the nature of this > tool, but I don’t think it’s a great idea to be writing system-using > code in 2024 when it’s easy to avoid. That way nobody needs to stop and > think carefully about whether the code is safe, because it is by > construction. > News to me, but also the first time I've used system in 15 or 20 years... Sure, I'll rework and add you to the reviewers. So TIL... Warner >