On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 09:32:23PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Horms wrote:
> >
> >I also agree that it is non-intitive. But I wonder if a cleaner
> >fix would be to remove CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START all together. Isn't
> >it just a work around for the kernel not being relocatable, or
> >are there uses for it that relocation can't replace?
> >
>
> Yes, booting with the 2^n existing bootloaders.
Ok, I must be confused then. I though CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START was
introduced in order to allow an alternative address to be provided for
kdump, and that previously it was hard-coded to some
architecture-specific value.
What I was really getting as is if it needs to be configurable at
compile time or not. Obviously there needs to be some sane default
regardless.
--
Horms
H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/
W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/
-
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]
