Re: [patch 1/3 v2] Add function get_bootparam

H. Peter Anvin
2013-11-18T05:36:26Z

In other words, we didn't catch that one in time. Oh well.

Dave Young <dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>On 11/17/13 at 07:29pm, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 11/17/2013 06:22 PM, Dave Young wrote:
>> > On 11/13/13 at 08:50am, Dave Young wrote:
>> >> On 11/12/13 at 06:51pm, Greg KH wrote:
>> >>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 01:37:25AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> >>>> On 11/12/2013 12:30 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> And these binary data blobs are a "standard" somewhere, and
>will not
>> >>>>> change per kernel version change?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If so, that structure is fine with me.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Correct. The structure is documented in
>Documentation/x86/boot.txt, and
>> >>>> has been largely invariant (but extended) since the beginning of
>Linux.
>> >>>> It has sometimes taken some serious work to keep it that way.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ok, then use the binary sysfs file interface for these blobs, and
>> >>> everyone will be happy.
>> >>
>> >> Since we got an agreement I will move them to sysfs in next
>version.
>> >
>> > I have created one patch for the sysfs part this weekend, bug I'm
>hesitating to
>> > remove the debugfs part because currently there's already user, I
>tend to
>> > keep them in debugfs for now.
>> >
>> > What do you think, Peter?
>> >
>>
>> Yes, it makes sense to keep them for compatibility, at least for now.
>> What is the specific user that already exists?
>
>kexec-tools is using it to setup hardware_subarch..
>
>--
>Thanks
>Dave

--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.