[lkml]   [1996]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: nfsroot anyone?

You (Linus Torvalds) wrote:
> > I just tried to load 1.3.74 via nfsroot. I get lots and lots of
> > "kill_fasync: bad magic number in fasync_struct!" messages scrolling
> > by.
> It looks like nfsroot does some _really_ bad things, and it needs to be
> cleaned up to work (David tells me it uses the _same_ inode for network
> connecting as for the actual NFS root inode -- I just hope he mis-read
> the code, but if he didn't that certainly needs to be cleaned up).
> There are some NFS-root changes in 1.3.75, but I haven't tested them and
> they don't look like they'd fix this particular problem. Could somebody
> who knows the nfsroot code take a look?

I'm going to take a look into this ASAP. However, I don't think implemen-
ting BOOTP into the kernel (as with 1.3.75) is such a good idea. It blows
up the kernel binary for being used just once. This should instead go into
the bootrom, which then sends the necessary parameters from the BOOTP
handling to the kernel with the appropriate kernel command line parameters.
This also reduces the number of BOOTP requests from one client. Other-
wise, the bootrom sends a request, then the kernel, and finally a BOOTP
user process. So, why should we implement BOOTP into the kernel? IMHO, we
should discuss this further.


I must invent my own philosophical systems, or else be enslaved by other mens'
- William Blake
Gero Kuhlmann, Hannover 0511/6497525 (Voice)

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.085 / U:0.240 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site