lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 08 May 2009 11:47:47 -0700
From"H. Peter Anvin" <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/14] RFC: x86: relocatable kernel changes
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Perhaps we should have:
> init_size
> best start (As a 64bit field please)
> optimum align (Or we flip it around)
>

Thinking about this some more, I think you have a very good idea here.

Specifically, if we retcon the existing kernel_alignment field as
"preferred alignment" (ignoring the naming issue for a bit), we can set
that to 16 MB, which should give us correct behavior for all previously
existing bootloaders. Then we create a new "minimum alignment" field
that newer bootloaders can use to relax the alignment requirement -- all
the way down to 4K in the case of i386. We document this field
indicating that the bootloader should find the highest power of 2 <=
preferred alignment, but down to this number.

The preferred address field becomes a readonly, advisory field; with it
being readonly there aren't any funny issues with a strange loader
writing a 64-bit address for a kernel which can't handle it (64-bit
loading will still need substantial protocol changes, including how to
find the entry point.)

Does that work for you? That *should* address all your concerns, right?

-hpa



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-08 20:51    [from the cache]
©2003-2010