Re: [GIT PULL] x86 setup: correct booting on 486 (revised)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

Eric W. Biederman wrote:


I have a hard time believing in discipline when I see the amount of
not invented here and various oddball mistakes (cause by overlooking
things) that seems to go on when extending the format.  We never
needed to change the way the command line was passed, and we should
have kept the longer jump where we had it.
The longer jump was never documented, and so didn't exist. There was definitely no way to rely on it.
The old command-line protocol had some really ugly interactions with the absolutely insane hoisting code from the pre-2.02 days. I didn't have enough guts back then to scream and just rip it out, mostly because it took me a long time to figure out what the heck it really did (as opposed to what it claimed it did.) That being said, we probably could have gotten away with leaving the protocol as-is while ripping out the guts (as I eventually did in the rewrite), even if the old protocol only had a 16-bit pointer. 


If we are going to through and add an additional pointer to a notes section
let's please put a jump in there so we can make the header longer as
we choose.
The problem is that that will only buy us 15 bytes, and eat up 3 (in practice, 4) of them...
It might be worth doing anyway, as it'd only break the 32-bit entrypoint users to reorganize struct boot_params. 

	-hpa

-
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]
  Powered by Linux