Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching

* Andi Kleen ([email protected]) wrote:
> The disassembly stuff indeed doesn't look like something
> that belongs in the kernel.

Strongly agreed.  The strict ABI requirements put forth here are not
in-line with Linux, IMO.  I think source compatibility is the limit of
reasonable, and any ROM code be in-tree if something like this were to
be viable upstream.

thanks,
-chris
-
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: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
    • From: Anthony Liguori <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
    • From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
    • From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Try 2, Fix release function in IPMI device model
• Next by Date: [PATCH] SCSI: link scsi_debug later (updated)
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
• 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]