lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
Chris Wright wrote:
> * Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de) wrote:
>
>> The disassembly stuff indeed doesn't look like something
>> that belongs in the kernel.
>>
>
> Strongly agreed. The strict ABI requirements put forth here are not
> in-line with Linux, IMO. I think source compatibility is the limit of
> reasonable, and any ROM code be in-tree if something like this were to
> be viable upstream.
>

Hi Chris,

Would you have less trouble if the "ROM" were actually more like a
module? Specifically, if it had a proper elf header and symbol table,
used symbols as entry points, and was a GPL interface (so that ROM's had
to be GPL)? Then it's just a kernel module that's hidden in the option
ROM space and has a C interface.

I know you end up losing the ability to do crazy inlining of the ROM
code but I think it becomes a much less hairy interface that way.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> thanks,
> -chris
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Virtualization mailing list
> Virtualization@lists.osdl.org
> https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
>

-
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: 2006-03-23 01:33    [W:0.096 / U:0.220 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site