Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE

Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> But the address of cmd_line_ptr is defined to be from the end of the
> setup to 0xa0000. This is well defined, since the boot loader will
> load the kernel, initramfs and cmd_line_ptr to the correct place...
> Nothing is overwritten... Then the kernel is up and takes as much as
> it needs from cmd_line_ptr.

OK, then: Update my patch if you want to and resubmit it. I would like
to get this through as quickly as possible.

Greetings,

Georg
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
    • From: Alon Bar-Lev <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
    • From: Georg Lippold <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
    • From: Georg Lippold <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
    • From: Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
    • From: Georg Lippold <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
    • From: Georg Lippold <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
    • From: Alon Bar-Lev <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
    • From: Georg Lippold <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
    • From: Alon Bar-Lev <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/1] 2.6.14-rc3 x86: COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]