Re: [patches] [PATCH] [21/22] x86_64: Extend bzImage protocol for relocatable bzImage

[ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)]

Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> writes:

> On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 21:38 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Rusty Russell wrote:
>> > 
>> > Dammit, Eric, you spend a lot of time using words like "insane" where
>> > you mean we didn't do everything all at once.
>> > 
>> > It's *not* clear that using %esi is sane, but nothing in the current
>> > code prevents that.
>> 
>> Why not?
>
> (I assume you mean why isn't it clear?)
>
> Because VMI uses the presence of a ROM to indicate it's not native.  KVM
> uses a magic MSR IIRC.

Reasonable, if you don't mid a little hardware emulation.

> I think it makes sense for lguest to change over, tho.  Patches welcome
> 8)

Sure.

Peter do we want to use the bootloader byte and assign lguest it's own
bootloader type or do we want to add another field specific to 
paravirtualized environments?

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/