lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86 Boot enhancements, boot protocol 2.04 7/9
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>>There can't be a "default load address". 0x90000 is actively dangerous and
>>trying to encourage it for anything than legacy kernels is WRONG. If you can't
>>handle this, then you need to go back to the drawing board.
>
>
> I agree. But I do think being able to hard code the load address is a
> very good thing.
>
> After digesting the requirements I plan on having setup.S call int 12h
> (so the information is available), and then having misc.c relocate the
> real mode code, and the command line, out of the way, of it's
> decompression buffer. This removes the need for bootloaders to
> make a tradeoff between memory use efficiency and reliability.
>
> This should give me about 630KB on machines designed to run DOS, where
> this matters. Better than the current best of 572KB, with the real
> mode code @ 0x90000.
>
> And when your total size is 1-4MB. +-640KB is a significant change.
>

Agreed. Note that so far putting the real mode code *above* 0x90000 is
completely untested. It *should* work with boot protocol 2.02 support;
it almost certainly *does not* work with earlier boot protocols (due to
the "move it back to 0x90000" braindamage.)
-hpa

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.156 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site