Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field | Date | Fri, 04 May 2007 13:31:47 -0600 |
| |
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:
> Indeed. I think, yes, what has been there up to now has pretty much > been at least in part experimental, and I fear there will be unavoidable > breakage as part of sanitizing it. C'est la vie, I guess.
The one significant one I left out I think is the VISWS. I'm not certain what we do there, but I know it never went through setup.S
Yes. At the same time we have been sufficiently disciplined (baring paravirt) that the changes should be quite small, and we have a big enough sample size now that we can pretty clearly see ways in which the code will vary.
>>>> And 4K seems to be our maximum size for backwards compatibility. Although >>>> we use it in a fairly sparse way, so we should be ok. >>> Sort of. It's pretty full. >> >> True. For small little extensions we have room. For big things probably >> not. > > For big extensions we'll probably have to go the pointer route already > done with the command line.
Likely. It is tricky because if we actually have to do a normal BIOS query to get it things a little sticky, because we can't allocate memory. Hmm. It looks like we need a way to export the size of our parameter area to the bootloader. We have setup_sects for 16bit real mode bootloaders and that should be good enough, but we need something equivalent for the 32bit entry point.
Requirements analysis here we come.
Eric - 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/
| |