From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>,
Chandramouli Narayanan <mouli@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v5 0/3] i386/x86_64 boot: 32-bit boot protocol
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 03:38:10 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1abqif5dp.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1192168345.17539.42.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> (Ying Huang's message of "Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:52:25 +0800")
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> writes:
> This patchset defines a 32-bit boot protocol for i386/x86_64 platform,
> adds an extensible boot parameter passing mechanism, export the boot
> parameters via sysfs.
>
> The patchset has been tested against 2.6.23-rc8-mm2 kernel on x86_64
> and i386.
>
> This patchset is based on the proposal of Peter Anvin.
>
>
> Known Issues:
>
> - Where is safe to place the linked list of setup_data? Because the
> length of the linked list of setup_data is variable, it can not be
> copied into BSS segment of kernel as that of "zero page". We must
> find a safe place for it, where it will not be overwritten by kernel
> during booting up. The i386 kernel will overwrite some pages after
> _end. The x86_64 kernel will overwrite some pages from 0x1000 on.
Well there actually is no reason to copy the current data into the
zero page. We really should just leave it where it is until the
kernel has managed to bootstrap it's basic services.
As for the setup data can we please remove the pointers. And just
require the that the data items be appended one after each other
in memory. Then we would just need a field where we could
report an offset to the binary data from where we loaded the
16bit code/data. We could even specify the end by requiring
that we fill in setup_move_size or something of that nature.
Beyond that we should provide the bootloaders enough information to
know which information the kernel will overwrite before it consults
the e820 map and other indicators of what memory is free.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-17 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-12 5:52 [PATCH -mm -v5 0/3] i386/x86_64 boot: 32-bit boot protocol Huang, Ying
2007-10-15 1:47 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-17 1:59 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-17 8:25 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-17 9:05 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-17 9:24 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-18 6:44 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-17 9:38 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2007-10-18 6:57 ` Huang, Ying
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=m1abqif5dp.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mouli@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/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