lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
Date
"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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-05-04 21:35    [W:0.078 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site