From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964924AbVHaWNR (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:13:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964923AbVHaWNR (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:13:17 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([209.128.68.124]:27601 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964924AbVHaWNQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:13:16 -0400 Message-ID: <43162B6A.2010806@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:12:58 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050720) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Wedgwood CC: Alon Bar-Lev , Andrew Morton , SYSLINUX@zytor.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit References: <4315B668.6030603@gmail.com> <43162148.9040604@zytor.com> <20050831215757.GA10804@taniwha.stupidest.org> <431628D5.1040709@zytor.com> <20050831220717.GA14625@taniwha.stupidest.org> In-Reply-To: <20050831220717.GA14625@taniwha.stupidest.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 03:01:57PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>Maybe not. Another option would simply be to bump it up >>significantly (2x isn't really that much.) 4096, maybe. > > I wonder if we're not at the point where we need something different > to what we have now. The concept of a command-line works for passing > simple state but for more complex things it's too cumbersome. Well, we have initramfs for the really big stuff. The kernel shouldn't really need that much data, though. -hpa