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

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

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:

> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> 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?
>> 
>
> The bootloader byte is already a bit too overused; I'm a little scared
> that we're going to run out of boot loader IDs as it is.
>
> We probably should add another field, and while we're at it maybe we
> should add a boot loader extension field.

A dedicated subarchitecture field would make sense.  One of the pieces
that would be nice is if we could detect other non paravirt
subarchitectures.

James is there a reasonable way to detect voyager at boot time?
So we could potentially have a generic kernel that can also boot on
voyager?

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/