Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>> Unlikely. Unless we expect that this offset will come in non-zero.
>>>
>> You might have to worry about that. Historically, the "zero-page" was
>> really just the setup code overwritten, and it's still true for a big
>> chunk of it.
>>
>> One of the major changes in my setup code rewrite is to start out with
>> an all-zero chunk of memory for this.
>
> Well as long as we are in sync with setup.S we are fine. The issue
> is people generating the real-mode data from scratch, when using the
> 32bit entry point.
Point. I'd like that interface to specify that any undefined fields
should be zero, or we have a hopeless situation on our hands.
By the way, see the following for the structure definition; prepare to barf:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hpa/linux-2.6-newsetup.git;a=blob;f=arch/i386/boot/boot.h;h=41a16f96ac3476cbd969aabe5e6a792ffe8c64a0;hb=HEAD
[I intend to move this into include/asm-i386/boot.h, but haven't gotten
that far yet. I just yesterday got the code booting on both i386 and
x86-64, but haven't committed all the include/asm-* mods that went a
long with that yet. I'm also waiting for a Kbuild fix so that the boot
directory can be shared between i386 and x86-64 without requiring a
symlink in the source tarball.]
-hpa
-
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]
