[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <500D691C.7010203@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 08:09:16 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, initramfs@...r.kernel.org,
bigeasy@...utronix.de, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] init: Introduce early initrd files through uncompressed
cpio passing
On 07/23/2012 07:40 AM, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> This is another problem and I expect I call:
> early_initrd_find_cpio_data()
> early enough for Fenghua's needs.
> If not, how early exactly is this needed?
We're calling that from arch-specific code before even turning paging
on. This has a couple of consequences:
1. ALL STATIC POINTERS ARE FORBIDDEN. Period. The code must be able to
be executed from a nonstandard linear address, and any static pointer
(like a function pointer) breaks that.
2. Any ideas of doing everything at the same time, or uniform
architecture, is clearly out the window... we're just barely capable of
using C at this point at all.
Now, you definitely do have a valid point about being able to iterate
over multiple files with a common prefix. We could do that with either
a callback (where the callback is passed in as an argument), but I think
it might be nicer to do that as an iterator interface... let me ketch on
this.
> If (just an example) CPU microcode files get passed via "early initrd",
> the same path could be provided than needed by request_fw().
This will all be obsolete. request_fw is available way, way, way too late.
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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