[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] build 32-bit Linux loader as `linux', rename legacy loader t

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: [PATCH] build 32-bit Linux loader as `linux', rename legacy loader to `linux16'
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:22:22 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 10:04:44AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 15:23 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 05:51:22PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > > 
> > > If we are circumventing the standard Linux bootloader, perhaps we should
> > > communicate this to the Linux developers.
> > 
> > This is not circumvention. We're using a 32-bit interface that's part of 
> > their
> > boot protocol specification (i.e. they promised not to break it).  The only
> > caveat is that so far it's only used on EFI and on coreboot, it hasn't been
> > so widespread, and therefore not so widely tested yet.
> I see.  It looks like the x86_64 kernel has code for printing strings in
> 16-bit mode and in 64-bit mode, but not in 32-bit mode, in which we
> enter the kernel.  So no easy fix, unfortunately.

It's possible to find a fix for this from Linux side, but IMHO the best
long-term fix would be to make whoever installed Linux _and_ GRUB figure
out what GRUB should do.  Not too much to ask, since we give them the tools
(cpuid command) to do it.

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]