From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1NIUrN-0006h7-Bx for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:18:13 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NIUrL-0006f8-6w for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:18:11 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NIUrG-0006cO-LJ for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:18:10 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55338 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NIUrG-0006cL-GD for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:18:06 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f215.google.com ([209.85.219.215]:60612) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NIUrG-0005w7-4N for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:18:06 -0500 Received: by ewy7 with SMTP id 7so9020703ewy.32 for ; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:18:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=Po+UglGE0BXqnY1q/hVh/B1qab1USzllkG6XhZw1SQ0=; b=ZGxbsMptcdJcGvNzqqAaBv5oBeOpksERKNcRiKPL/j74GjSTmX22rd1sEFawyt4MEp R5NUxuzfzIEkBF2vudSF3vhNBeGH7tdtYh6KvFl7MCuAlWW07QH00x0n+T3sXPqpbSWw UCSrBZfUGUa8WVhd7T3qwh/k95W5uAqhkt3Io= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=sV7AuZQY4rXyE/ie0pNi5ePGRy5KDmnBjgHWfQDVT8SDkX6+S91qMCwUUiZBCC28HR y7tXIEJK8LgVAmGAW8+DjU/1LxSRaGVPlefFUUIm7vBLRSjXfy1faOznImM+NCA6ZTIL lx5LgA055KiX9GL1YKRLV2h6Wn3lN8xn9E3qg= Received: by 10.213.0.196 with SMTP id 4mr11138224ebc.41.1260397082671; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:18:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from debian.bg45.phnet (gprs36.swisscom-mobile.ch [193.247.250.36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 15sm179251ewy.0.2009.12.09.14.18.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:18:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B202212.2090201@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:17:54 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltaXIgJ8+GLWNvZGVyL3BoY29kZXInIFNlcmJpbmVua28=?= User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20091109) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The development of GNU GRUB References: <20091207150831.GA8047@thorin> <4B201BC7.2050703@gmail.com> <20091209220351.GJ7093@thorin> In-Reply-To: <20091209220351.GJ7093@thorin> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigF8500E862F93C0AD4E9E0361" X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) Subject: Re: my plan for Multiboot 2 X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:18:11 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigF8500E862F93C0AD4E9E0361 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Robert Millan wrote: > On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 10:51:03PM +0100, Vladimir '=CF=86-coder/phcode= r' Serbinenko wrote: > =20 >> Robert Millan wrote: >> =20 >>> Hi, >>> >>> We have an obvious problem with the Multiboot 2 loader: It's in >>> severe bitrot. Nobody complains because nobody uses it, which is >>> understandable given that nobody programs for MB2, because it's not >>> ready (both in spec and in implementation), and we don't improve it >>> because nobody complains, etc. You get the point :-) >>> >>> I think the approach that was taken has proven wrong. It might have >>> worked with more manpower, but our time resources are scarce and we h= ave >>> other priorities. In my opinion, as things stand now it is best if >>> Multiboot 2 is developed by piggybacking on Multiboot 1 rather than a= s an >>> isolated effort. This idea is twofold: both in spec and in implement= ation. >>> >>> =20 >>> =20 >> Do you plan on removing multiboot2 loader from grub2 and marking >> multiboot2 draft as abandonded? >> =20 > > I don't know. Do you think this would be necessary? I was thinking we= could > gradually replace it in parallel, but I'm open to ideas/suggestions. > > =20 If I have multibootdraft correctly in head the only 2 new things are tagged mbi and multi-CPU. We can add tagged MBI to multiboot1 in compatible way but we have to rethink howexactly it will look like - current draft is contradictory and so it's easier to make new one inspired by old ideas than try to rescue old one. Although powerpc is defined in multiboot2 draft it's not implemented in grub2. Safe to assume nobody used it >> I think cpu-independency should come after possible incompatible chang= es >> since if we bring bad but compatible decision to non-x86 then it will = be >> difficult to eradicate. >> =20 > > I don't understand very well; could you give an example of problematic= > situation? > > =20 The most obvious are feature bits: we have statically allocated 32 bits, 16 optional, 16 required features. On platforms where OS needs a lot of hardware info it may be too few. Another problem is pointer-rich mbi which needs complicated processing before it can be relocated. Since often it has to be done before launching C code it makes startup assembly unnecessarily complex --=20 Regards Vladimir '=CF=86-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko --------------enigF8500E862F93C0AD4E9E0361 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iF4EAREKAAYFAksgIhkACgkQNak7dOguQgm9zAD/TlLeJEFvhnLtcKaNj0tAEBey ffpKkVlkuhiu6mprjMQBAK+l40mwNpaODgtd6sSL2wEqnKn9V3vzbZp3H8yVhVYT =aiSB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigF8500E862F93C0AD4E9E0361--