From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1ceBTk-0005X6-Vh for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:07:28 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39743) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ceBTi-0005Wl-6M for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:07:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ceBTf-0006hv-0M for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:07:26 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:45218) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ceBTe-0006hj-N8 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:07:22 -0500 Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Feb 2017 18:07:21 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,167,1484035200"; d="scan'208";a="65737633" Received: from pengc-desk.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.255.27.23]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2017 18:07:17 -0800 Message-ID: <1487210836.3019.2.camel@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/boot: make ELF kernel multiboot-able From: Chao Peng To: hpa@zytor.com, "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, grub-devel@gnu.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Andy Lutomirski , Juergen Gross , Borislav Petkov , Josh Poimboeuf , Thomas Garnier , Al Viro , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Paolo Bonzini , Amnon Ilan , Alexander Graf , Matt Fleming , Daniel Kiper Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 10:07:16 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: <1487169716-58415-1-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> <60323D2A-BB58-4112-B21C-62D7A483F2D3@zytor.com> <20170215201336.GA24047@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 192.55.52.115 X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 02:07:27 -0000 > > Just something to consider, provided the issues with multiboot get > > resolved: > > > > If you want to boot Xen you actually use the multiboot protocol, the > > last PVH > > boot patches had borrowed ideas from Multiboot to add an entry to > > Linux, only > > it was Xen'ified. What would be Multiboot 2 seemed flexible enough to > > allow all > > sorts of custom semantics and information stacked into a boot image. > > The last > > thought I had over this topic (before giving up)  was-- if we're going > > to add > > yet-another-entry (TM) why not add extend Mulitiboot 2 protocol with > > the > > semantics we need to boot any virtual environment and then add > > Multiboot 2 > > support entry on Linux? We could redirect any custom boot mechanism > > then to > > just use that given its flexibility. > > > >  Luis > > Multiboot has a fundamentally broken assumption, which is to do certain work for the kernel in the > bootloader.  This is fundamentally a bad idea, because you always want to do things in the latest > step possible during the boot process, being the most upgradeable, and have the interface as > narrow as possible. > > Therefore, using Multiboot is actively a negative step.  It is declared an "Open Standard" but > anything can be such declared; it really is a claim that "everything should work like Grub." Thanks Peter and Luis for comments. Chao