On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 08:01 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > We should place that initial branch right after startup_32, > we don't need the startup_paravirt at all now. > > ENTRY(startup_32) > #ifdef CONFIG_LGUEST_GUEST > cmpl $1, 0x23c(%esi) > je lguest_init > #endif Hi Eric! Makes sense to me, but I wasn't sure... do we need to check for old bootloader versions and such? Thanks, Rusty. - 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 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- References:
- [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- Prev by Date: Re: c 's OOP in VFS vs c++'s OOP
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Replace paravirt_probe with "platform type" boot header field
- Index(es):
 |