lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Kernels > 1M
Date
From
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site