Etienne Lorrain <[email protected]> writes:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Actually, as far as I can see, he has re-invented having a real-mode
>> code chunk which then gets run before the protected-mode kernel. We
>> already have that!
>
> I did not claim to have invented anything there, this is just a quite
> simple C code to execute instead of the current real mode assembly:
> it is a rewrite with obvious advantages/disadvantages.
> New features are more that this real-mode function can return an error
> to the bootloader to tell something to the user, so the user can select
> another kernel with the right processor, another video mode... with
> clean error messages - not a crash dump because this assembly
> instruction is not for that processor.
Having an error handling compatibility that is backwards compatible sounds
interesting.
> I am still saying that the bootloader knows the root filesystem to
> be used by the kernel it loads, and that ELF is a clean format to
> store different sections to be loaded into memory at predefined
> addresses.
Yes. Although when you think sections instead of segments I'm a little
worried.
> Also there isn't any more kernel size limit.
I think as HPA points out we have gotten past that a long time
ago with the bzImage format.
With the right delicacy, and preserving backwards compatibility
with existing bootloaders I think we can achieve things.
The big issue is that sometimes bootloaders are a little bit brittle.
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
