Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:03:20 -0700 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 04/10] i386: clean up bzImage generation |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > >> H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >>> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >>> >>> >>>> -setup_move_size: .word 0x8000 # size to move, when setup is not >>>> +setup_move_size: .word _setup_size # size to move, when setup is not >>>> # loaded at 0x90000. We will move setup >>>> # to 0x90000 then just before jumping >>>> # into the kernel. However, only the >>>> >>>> >>> This is WRONG and will break 2.00 protocol bootloaders, if any still >>> exist, and quite possibly some 2.01 protocol bootloaders. There are >>> definitiely bootloaders in the field that rely on this implicit value. >>> >> Ah, I see. I didn't see any documentation saying that this must be >> 0x8000. Or does _setup_size just have to be <= 0x8000? >> >> > > The default for unaware bootloaders has been 0x8000 since the boot > protocol was created, and bootloaders are known to (improperly) rely on > it. _setup_size does have to be <= 0x8000, but that's another issue. >
Hm, so the worst that could happen is that an old bootloader will over-copy 0x8000 bytes rather than the specified amount? How would that break anything?
> I said it probably wouldn't hurt to drop it. I don't believe you ever > actually explained why you wanted it dropped.
Well, I don't specifically care for Xen; I don't really mind either way in general. I'll break it into a separate patch and we can handle it that way.
J - 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/
| |