[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110113100407.GB24149@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:04:07 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>,
Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: ARM: relocation out of range (when loading a module)
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 06:50:05AM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Am 12.01.2011 19:42, schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux:
>
>> As the overall feeling at the time was "don't use large initrds" it's
>> something I've never really cared about - and I'm still of the opinion
>> that 16MB of compressed initrd/initramfs is rather silly.
>
> Hmm, sorry, I have to disagree. ;)
> E.g. 12MB out of the 16MB in the initramfs I've used are modules.
> I've also created some larger initramfs wich included X11 and such, and
> I find it very convenient to use the initramfs to include a rootfs in
> the the kernel and so only have to handle one file for all. E.g. just
> load the kernel with the included rootfs via tftp and you are done.
Oddly, that's why I wrote the bootp wrapper, which predates the
currently broken initrd-in-kernel idea.
> Sure this can all be done using an external initrd, but that is much
> less comfortable to use.
>
> At least I like that feature since it is available and won't miss it now. ;)
The feature isn't available if it doesn't work. It's not going to get
fixed for 2.6.38 - it'll be 2.6.39 due to the timing and complexity of
the problem.
--
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