[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Acpi] Re: ACPI fundamental locking problems

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Helge Hafting wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We migth want to just make initrd a built-in thing in the kernel,
> > something that you simply cannot avoid. A lot of these things (ie dhcp for
> > NFS root etc) are right now done in kernel space, simply because we don't
> > want to depend on initrd, and people want to use old loaders.
> >
> > I don't like the current initrd very much myself, I have to admit. I'm not
> > going to accept a "you have to have a ramdisk" approach - I think the
> > ramdisks are really broken.
> >
> > But I've seen a "populate ramfs from a tar-file built into 'bzImage'"
> > patch somewhere, and that would be a whole lot more palatable to me.
> >
> > If anybody were to send me a patch that just unconditionally does this, I
> > would probably not be adverse to putting it into 2.5.x. We have all the
> > infrastructure to make all this a lot cleaner than it used to be (ie the
> > "pivot_root()" stuff etc means that we can _truly_ do things from user
> > mode, with no magic kernel flags).

Open 2.5 and I'm starting to feed that stuff in pieces...

> I am fine with "You have to use initrd (or similiar) _if_ you want this
> feature."

"Similar" == ramfs.

> But please don't make initrd mandatory for those of us who don't
> need ACPI, don't need dhcp before mounting disks and so on.

How about "don't want to keep special-case code for mounting root in your
kernel"? It's more than ramfs, BTW, and rm(1) on ramfs frees memory just

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:56    [W:0.187 / U:0.804 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site