Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: Kernels > 1M | | Date | Sun, 22 Aug 1999 16:09:58 -0700 | | From | Zack Weinberg <> |
| |
Mirian Crzig Lennox wrote: > Zack Weinberg <zack@bitmover.com> writes: > > > > > > The 16-bit setup code *has* to run in real mode... that's the only > > > reason it's 16 bit. As far as the APM BIOS, I'm sure you're aware of > > > the number of problems caused by APM BIOSes that don't like to be called > > > the way Linux calls them? > > > > I'll defer to you since you know more about x86 than me, but I don't > > see why it's necessary to do any of the setup.S sequence in real > > mode. Especially since the BSDs seem to manage it in protected mode > > fine. > > BSD uses a two-stage bootloader. The second stage is usually a file > called "boot" in the root directory of the root partition which is > "tied" to the real-mode bootstrap by a utility program in the same way > that vmlinuz'es are tied to the lilo bootstrap via the lilo program.
I know - and /boot does do a lot of the work that our setup.S does. But it's written mostly in C and it does everything from protected mode. Look at /usr/src/sys/i386/boot/biosboot - my copy is from FreeBSD 3.2, but the code hasn't changed much since 1992.
They do it, we can do it too.
zw
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |