[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45241945.2020105@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 13:27:49 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: vgoyal@...ibm.com
CC: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Reloc Kernel List <fastboot@...ts.osdl.org>, ak@...e.de,
horms@...ge.net.au, lace@...kratochvil.net, magnus.damm@...il.com,
lwang@...hat.com, dzickus@...hat.com, maneesh@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] i386 boot: Add an ELF header to bzImage
Vivek Goyal wrote:
>
> Eric/Peter,
>
> How about just extending bzImage format to include some info in real mode
> kernel header. Say protocol version 2.05. I think if we just include two
> more fields, is kernel relocatable and equivalent of ELF memsz, then probably
> this information should be enough for kexec bzImage loader to load and run
> a relocatable kernel from a different address.
>
What would be the exact semantics of the "equivalent of ELF memsz"? I
have balked on that one in the past, because the proposed semantics were
unsafe.
I suspect we need at least one more piece of data, which is the required
alignment of a relocated kernel. Either which way, it seems clear that
there is some re-engineering that needs to be done, and I think we need
to better understand *why* the proposed patch failed.
Can this failure be reproduced in a simulator?
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists