Re: [RFC] ELF Relocatable x86 and x86_64 bzImages

From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Tue Aug 08 2006 - 00:34:30 EST

Horms wrote:

I also agree that it is non-intitive. But I wonder if a cleaner
fix would be to remove CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START all together. Isn't
it just a work around for the kernel not being relocatable, or
are there uses for it that relocation can't replace?

Yes, booting with the 2^n existing bootloaders.

Relocation, as far as I've understood this patch, refers to loaded address, not runtime address.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at