[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0711041615380.15101@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 16:23:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix i486 boot failure due to stale %ds
On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> So I'd suggest having both jumps back-to-back, but realistically, the
> first regular short jump is actually the one that is more important.
> That's the one that really matters on i386/i486 class machines, and later
> CPU's will generally do the right thing even with _neither_ jump there.
That's obviously badly phrased.
The far jump is obviously required on all CPU's in order for us to
actually finally get to 32-bit protected mode and reload CS, but what I
*meant* was that we certainly also know that "unreal mode" works and is
used by various strange DOS extenders, and that not doing the far jump
isn't really required for having a "working setup" - it's just going to be
a rather limited mode.
So the short jump is required for the code to *work*. The long jump is
required only to get us the 32-bit mode we *want* and out of the odd
"half-way" state. Two different issues.
Linus
-
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