From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LU3MM-0003e5-P7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:17:26 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LU3MK-0003bu-Vq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:17:26 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33072 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LU3MK-0003bm-NC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:17:24 -0500
Received: from mail.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:45114 helo=mx1.suse.de)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1LU3MK-0003t9-BS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:17:24 -0500
Message-ID: <498738AE.6080808@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:17:18 +0100
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add multi-boot kernel loading support
References: <49873680.2040603@exactcode.de>
	<20090202181541.GB15286@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090202181541.GB15286@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ren=E9_Rebe?= <rene@exactcode.de>, froydnj@codesourcery.com

Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 07:08:00PM +0100, Rene Rebe wrote:
>   
>> +    /* 660f011528000000            lgdt [0x28] */
>> +    *p++ = 0x66;                /* 32-bit operand size */
>> +    *p++ = 0x67;                /* 32-bit addr size */
>> +    *p++ = 0x0f;                /* LGDT [0x128] */
>> +    *p++ = 0x01;
>> +    *p++ = 0x15;
>> +    pgdt=p; /* we calculate the gdt position later */
>> +    p+=4;
>>     
>
> The comments do not appear to agree with the code here.  (The operands
> for lgdt are different, at the very least.)
>
> -Nathan
>   
Right, because the operands are actually calculated dynamically. Any
suggestions on how to improve that? Maybe LGDT [GDT]?

Alex