lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Kernels > 1M
Dominik Kubla wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 09, 1999 at 10:36:00AM +0200, Werner Almesberger wrote:
>
> > Considering that nothing but bootsect.S itself uses syssize, the most
> > straightforward solution to the problem seems to be to change the unit
> > of syssize from paragraphs to sectors, to increase the header version
> > number in setup.S (not 100% clean, but the best approximation to a
> > version number for bootsect.S we have), and to update the checks
> > accordingly.
> >
>
> Hi Werner et al.,
>
> how about dropping the boot and setup code from the kernel entirely?
> Just move the whole stuff to the bootloader (as it used to be done
> with commercial Unices on PC's) and have it setup the whole 32Bit PM
> environment, load the (possibly zipped) vmlinux binary (not necessarily in
> this order), pass the config options on the command line (or through some
> reserved memory) and execute it.
>
> Thus we would no longer need as86/ld86 to build the kernel (see the thread
> about this topic) and building the kernel would be the same as on
> SPARC/MIPS/ALPHA...

bootsect.S could definitely be dropped, but I personally suspect it
would be a mistake to drop the setup. Otherwise the dependencies
between boot loader and kernel would be a lot more painful.

> The next step then would be to merge MILO(Alpha), MILO(Mips), LILO and SILO
> (Werner. we talked about that over dinner back at Linux-Kongress in
> Würzburg, remember?) into a common bootloader for all architectures. That
> should make life a bit easier for the distributors and documentation
> authors ...
>
> Are there any _REAL_ problems that would prevent this?

Well, except for the fact that booting is so incredibly different on
different architectures...

It would probably be quite a bit easier with the "lbcon" boot loader I'm
currently working on, if only because it runs in a 32-bit environment
and most of it is C code, compiled with gcc. That doesn't mean that
there needs to be code that is substantially different between the
various architectures.

The main reason I'm writing lbcon is because I think it will make doing
fancy stuff with initrd a lot less painful, and it should be easy to put
a nice user interface on it. That's the theory, at least...

-hpa

-
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    [W:0.182 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site