Re: Extending boot protocol & bzImage for paravirt_ops

Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-06-01T21:47:30Z

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Do we care particularly? If 8 bytes is enough for the subarch, do we
>> care whether its a pointer or literal? After all, this is just a private
>> channel between the bootloader and some subarch-specific piece of code
>> in the kernel.
>>
>>
>
> I see two options: either we make it a pointer *and a length* so that a
> loader can reshuffle it at will (that also implies no absolute pointers
> within the data), or it's an opaque cookie anyway.
>

No, it has to be completely opaque. It might be a pointer to some
special shared memory or something, and not movable.

J