Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:08:05 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm -v4 0/3] i386/x86_64 boot: 32-bit boot protocol |
| |
Huang, Ying wrote: > On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 12:23 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Huang, Ying wrote: >>> - Which fields of boot parameters should be exported directly in >>> sysfs? Export all fields of boot parameters in sysfs is too complex >>> and unnecessary. Which fields should be? >>> >> The main this is that since this is a fixed-format, ABI-defined >> structure, regardless of individual fields it should be exported as a >> binary object. That is also the only way to deal with a kernel which >> may not itself know about specific items making the data available to >> other users, like kexec. >> >> It's not clear to me from reading the code what model you're using for >> exporting this data in sysfs. Could you describe it in some detail? >> >> What I had envisioned would be an object for the boot_params structure >> and a systematic object for each linked-list object, at a very minimum. >> > > OK. The directory structure is as follow: > > + sys + kernel + boot_params - version /* version of boot protocol */ > - data /* binary file of boot_params */ > + setup_data + 0 - type /* type id of setup_data 0 */ > - data /* binary file of setup_data 0 */ > + 1 - type /* type id of setup_data 1 */ > - data /* binary file of setup_data 1 */ > + 2 - type > - data > ... >
Looks good to me.
-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/
| |