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
>