From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1JAxXM-0003Ig-QS for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:09:20 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JAxXJ-0003GB-Vi for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:09:18 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JAxXJ-0003Fh-2V for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:09:17 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAxXI-0003Fe-Ug for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:09:16 -0500 Received: from ns39764.ovh.net ([91.121.25.85] helo=nexedi.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JAxXI-0003DT-JG for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:09:16 -0500 Received: from [10.8.0.46] (unknown [10.8.0.46]) by nexedi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F943EB24 for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:14:04 +0100 (CET) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:09:14 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <20080102170533.GA29024@thorin> <200801030046.15405.okuji@enbug.org> <20080103010637.GD6843@thorin> In-Reply-To: <20080103010637.GD6843@thorin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801050209.14312.okuji@enbug.org> X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: [PATCH] memtest86+ fix X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:09:18 -0000 On Thursday 03 January 2008 02:06, Robert Millan wrote: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:46:15AM +0100, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > > On Wednesday 02 January 2008 18:05, Robert Millan wrote: > > > This fixes boot for memtest86+ (and actually, Linux zImages since they > > > were all affected). > > > > > > The problem was that the first code in grub_linux_boot_zimage copied > > > the payload from 0x100000 to 0x10000. Since GRUB starts at 0x8200 and > > > is typicaly more than 8 kiB in size, it'll most likely overwrite part > > > of it. > > > > > > A bit of reestructuring was necessary to allow grub_dl_unload_all() to > > > happen unconditionally as first step, since the information on whether > > > this is a "big linux" was not promptly available. > > > > > > Comments? > > > > It is okay, except for "grub_linux_big"... I cannot figure out what it > > wants to say. As you want to make it global, please choose a more > > expressive name, such as "grub_big_linux_loaded". > > How about "grub_linux_big_loaded", for consistency with the other vars in > that also start with grub_linux_ ? "big_loaded" sounds horrible to me. How about grub_linux_big_image_loaded? Okuji