From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [patches] [PATCH] [21/22] x86_64: Extend bzImage protocol for relocatable bzImage Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 23:25:53 -0600 Message-ID: References: <20070428758.455116000@suse.de> <20070428175909.1D09D151CA@wotan.suse.de> <46338D72.70402@garzik.org> <4634483E.9030307@goop.org> <1177902195.30071.203.camel@localhost.localdomain> <463572B7.90202@zytor.com> <1177909434.30071.216.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1177909434.30071.216.camel@localhost.localdomain> (Rusty Russell's message of "Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:03:54 +1000") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Rusty Russell Cc: Jeff Garzik , patches@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vivek Goyal , "H. Peter Anvin" , virtualization List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Rusty Russell writes: > On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 21:38 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Rusty Russell wrote: >> > >> > Dammit, Eric, you spend a lot of time using words like "insane" where >> > you mean we didn't do everything all at once. >> > >> > It's *not* clear that using %esi is sane, but nothing in the current >> > code prevents that. >> >> Why not? > > (I assume you mean why isn't it clear?) > > Because VMI uses the presence of a ROM to indicate it's not native. KVM > uses a magic MSR IIRC. Reasonable, if you don't mid a little hardware emulation. > I think it makes sense for lguest to change over, tho. Patches welcome > 8) Sure. Peter do we want to use the bootloader byte and assign lguest it's own bootloader type or do we want to add another field specific to paravirtualized environments? Eric