From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>,
Chandramouli Narayanan <mouli@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC -mm 2/2] i386/x86_64 boot: document for 32 bit boot protocol
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:56:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1190084206.12429.20.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46EF2E5A.3060806@zytor.com>
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 18:48 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Huang, Ying wrote:
> >
> > OK, I will check the actual structure, and change the document
> > accordingly.
> >
>
> The best would probably be to fix zero-page.txt (and probably rename it
> something saner.)
Does the patch appended with the mail seems better?
If it is desired, I can move the zero page description into
zero-page.txt, and refer to it in 32-bit boot protocol description.
I delete the hd0_info and hd1_info from the zero page. If it is
undesired, I will move them back.
The field in zero page is fairly complex (such as struct edd_info). Do
you think it is necessary to document every field inside the first level
field, until the primary data type? Or we just provide the C struct
name?
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
---
Index: linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/i386/boot.txt
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.23-rc4.orig/Documentation/i386/boot.txt 2007-09-18 10:40:34.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/i386/boot.txt 2007-09-18 10:46:13.000000000 +0800
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
----------------------------
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
- Last update 2007-05-23
+ Last update 2007-09-14
On the i386 platform, the Linux kernel uses a rather complicated boot
convention. This has evolved partially due to historical aspects, as
@@ -42,6 +42,9 @@
Protocol 2.06: (Kernel 2.6.22) Added a field that contains the size of
the boot command line
+Protocol 2.07: (kernel 2.6.23) Added a field of 64-bit physical
+ pointer to single linked list of struct setup_data.
+ Added 32-bit boot protocol.
**** MEMORY LAYOUT
@@ -168,6 +171,9 @@
0234/1 2.05+ relocatable_kernel Whether kernel is relocatable or not
0235/3 N/A pad2 Unused
0238/4 2.06+ cmdline_size Maximum size of the kernel command line
+023c/4 N/A pad3 Unused
+0240/8 2.07+ setup_data 64-bit physical pointer to linked list
+ of struct setup_data
(1) For backwards compatibility, if the setup_sects field contains 0, the
real value is 4.
@@ -480,6 +486,36 @@
cmdline_size characters. With protocol version 2.05 and earlier, the
maximum size was 255.
+Field name: setup_data
+Type: write (obligatory)
+Offset/size: 0x240/8
+Protocol: 2.07+
+
+ The 64-bit physical pointer to NULL terminated single linked list of
+ struct setup_data. This is used to define a more extensible boot
+ parameters passing mechanism. The definition of struct setup_data is
+ as follow:
+
+ struct setup_data {
+ u64 next;
+ u32 type;
+ u32 len;
+ u8 data[0];
+ } __attribute__((packed));
+
+ Where, the next is a 64-bit physical pointer to the next node of
+ linked list, the next field of the last node is 0; the type is used
+ to identify the contents of data; the len is the length of data
+ field; the data holds the real payload.
+
+ With this field, to add a new boot parameter written by bootloader,
+ it is not needed to add a new field to real mode header, just add a
+ new setup_data type is sufficient. But to add a new boot parameter
+ read by bootloader, it is still needed to add a new field.
+
+ TODO: Where is the safe place to place the linked list of struct
+ setup_data?
+
**** THE KERNEL COMMAND LINE
@@ -753,3 +789,57 @@
After completing your hook, you should jump to the address
that was in this field before your boot loader overwrote it
(relocated, if appropriate.)
+
+
+**** SETUP DATA TYPES
+
+
+**** 32-bit BOOT PROTOCOL
+
+For machine with some new BIOS other than legacy BIOS, such as EFI,
+LinuxBIOS, etc, and kexec, the 16-bit real mode setup code in kernel
+based on legacy BIOS can not be used, so a 32-bit boot protocol need
+to be defined.
+
+In 32-bit boot protocol, the first step in loading a Linux kernel
+should still be to load the real-mode code and then examine the kernel
+header at offset 0x01f1. But, it is not necessary to load all
+real-mode code, just first 4K bytes traditionally known as "zero page"
+is needed.
+
+In addition to read/modify/write kernel header of the zero page as
+that of 16-bit boot protocol, the boot loader should fill the
+following additional fields of the zero page too.
+
+Offset Proto Name Meaning
+/Size
+
+000/040 2.07+ screen_info Text mode or frame buffer information
+ (struct screen_info)
+040/014 2.07+ apm_bios_info APM BIOS information (struct apm_bios_info)
+060/010 2.07+ ist_info Intel SpeedStep (IST) BIOS support information
+ (struct ist_info)
+0A0/010 2.07+ sys_desc_table System description table (struct sys_desc_table)
+140/080 2.07+ edid_info Video mode setup (struct edid_info)
+1C0/020 2.07+ efi_info EFI 32 information (struct efi_info)
+1E0/004 2.07+ alk_mem_k Alternative mem check, in KB
+1E4/004 2.07+ scratch Scratch field for the kernel setup code
+1E8/001 2.07+ e820_entries Number of entries in e820_map (below)
+1E9/001 2.07+ eddbuf_entries Number of entries in eddbuf (below)
+1EA/001 2.07+ edd_mbr_sig_buf_entries Number of entries in edd_mbr_sig_buffer
+ (below)
+290/040 2.07+ edd_mbr_sig_buffer EDD MBR signatures
+2D0/A00 2.07+ e820_map E820 memory map table
+ (array of struct e820entry)
+D00/1EC 2.07+ eddbuf EDD data (array of struct edd_info)
+
+After loading and setuping the zero page, the boot loader can load the
+32/64-bit kernel in the same way as that of 16-bit boot protocol.
+
+In 32-bit boot protocol, the kernel is started by jumping to the
+32-bit kernel entry point, which is the start address of loaded
+32/64-bit kernel.
+
+At entry, the CPU must be in 32-bit protected mode with paging
+disabled; the CS and DS must be 4G flat segments; %esi holds the base
+address of the "zero page"; %esp, %ebp, %edi should be zero.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-18 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-17 8:26 [RFC -mm 2/2] i386/x86_64 boot: document for 32 bit boot protocol Huang, Ying
2007-09-17 15:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-09-18 1:13 ` Huang, Ying
2007-09-18 1:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-09-18 2:56 ` Huang, Ying [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1190084206.12429.20.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com \
--to=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mouli@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.