From: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
To: kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Kexec command line length
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:50:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080114145014.GA21412@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080114134303.GA947@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
* Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> [2008-01-14 14:43]:
> Hey all-
> Regarding this bug:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9641
> I'd like to look into putting together a patch for it, and wanted to
> solicit comments for the best way to go about doing it. Currently I've got it
> fixed up in the Red Hat tree by bumping COMMAND_LINE_SIZE to 2048 and
> eliminating the reserved buffer of the x86_linux_faked_param_header, which works
> well, but isn't backwards compatible as Bernhard pointed out. Given that extra
> constraint, I thought it woudl e best to unify the command line and reserved
> buffers in x86_linux_faked_param_header to one contiguour 2048 byte block and
> maintain a separate variable that defines the command line length based on a
> parsing of the UTS_VERSION. Does that sound reasonable to everyone, or is there
> a better way that someone has in mind?
For bzImage we can take the size in the header (that's also better for
the future).
Bernhard
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-14 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-14 13:43 Kexec command line length Neil Horman
2008-01-14 14:50 ` Bernhard Walle [this message]
2008-01-14 15:40 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-15 15:27 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-15 17:09 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-15 17:37 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-25 12:35 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-25 15:39 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-25 15:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-01-25 19:50 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-25 19:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-01-25 20:11 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-25 20:13 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-25 20:54 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-28 17:08 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-28 19:37 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-28 20:07 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-28 20:20 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-28 20:53 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-28 21:09 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-28 21:29 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-01-29 1:01 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-29 15:41 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-29 18:17 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-01-29 18:52 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-29 19:57 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-30 20:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-30 20:59 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-30 21:08 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-30 21:18 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-30 21:45 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-01-31 0:10 ` Neil Horman
2008-01-31 7:16 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-02-12 21:11 ` Neil Horman
2008-02-18 3:14 ` Simon Horman
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=20080114145014.GA21412@suse.de \
--to=bwalle@suse.de \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox