Re: [patches] [PATCH] [21/22] x86_64: Extend bzImage protocol for relocatable bzImage

From: Eric W. Biederman
Date: Mon Apr 30 2007 - 01:26:58 EST

Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 21:38 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Rusty Russell wrote:
>> >
>> > Dammit, Eric, you spend a lot of time using words like "insane" where
>> > you mean we didn't do everything all at once.
>> >
>> > It's *not* clear that using %esi is sane, but nothing in the current
>> > code prevents that.
>> Why not?
> (I assume you mean why isn't it clear?)
> Because VMI uses the presence of a ROM to indicate it's not native. KVM
> uses a magic MSR IIRC.

Reasonable, if you don't mid a little hardware emulation.

> I think it makes sense for lguest to change over, tho. Patches welcome
> 8)


Peter do we want to use the bootloader byte and assign lguest it's own
bootloader type or do we want to add another field specific to
paravirtualized environments?

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