Hi folks,
how about adding something like this to init/do_mounts.c?
--- do_mounts.c.orig 2003-11-12 12:49:12.000000000 +0100
+++ do_mounts.c 2003-11-12 12:02:05.000000000 +0100
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include "do_mounts.h"
extern int get_filesystem_list(char * buf);
+extern asmlinkage long sys_access(const char * filename, int mode);
int __initdata rd_doload; /* 1 = load RAM disk, 0 = don't load */
@@ -393,6 +394,13 @@
if (initrd_load())
goto out;
+ /*
+ * check if there is an early userspace init, if yes
+ * let it do all the work
+ */
+ if (sys_access("/sbin/init", 0) == 0)
+ goto out;
+
if (is_floppy && rd_doload && rd_load_disk(0))
ROOT_DEV = Root_RAM0;
I wont to be able to fetch the boot= parameter via /proc/cmdline
in kinit and choose the boot devices, so I dislike the boot=0:0
suggestion.
Also, should the above code clear the init= parameter, i.e.
main.c:execute_command?
Cheers,
Michael.
--
Michael Schroeder [email protected]
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 03:50, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> how about adding something like this to init/do_mounts.c?
It's not a bad idea, but surely you should be using the init= boot
parameter instead of hard-coding a path.
In any case, I don't think you should expect a patch to be accepted.
There's not much point in further crufting up do_mounts.c in generic
kernels during 2.6, until do_mounts moves completely out of the kernel.
Some people are happy enough with root=0:0, so there's not obviously a
consensus about which stopgap measure will do for now.
<b
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:45:19AM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 03:50, Michael Schroeder wrote:
>
> > how about adding something like this to init/do_mounts.c?
>
> It's not a bad idea, but surely you should be using the init= boot
> parameter instead of hard-coding a path.
I'm not so sure about this. One can argue that the init= parameter
should be evaluated by kinit when calling the real init.
> In any case, I don't think you should expect a patch to be accepted.
> There's not much point in further crufting up do_mounts.c in generic
> kernels during 2.6, until do_mounts moves completely out of the kernel.
> Some people are happy enough with root=0:0, so there's not obviously a
> consensus about which stopgap measure will do for now.
Well, root=0:0 also needs a kernel patch and has the disadvantage
that one cannot specify the desired root as a boot option.
The point is that it is impossible to use initramfs as a
initrd replacement with the current code (2.6-test9), so one
of the patches should go in, either the 0:0 patch or my patch.
Cheers,
Michael.
--
Michael Schroeder [email protected]
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
Followup to: <[email protected]>
By author: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <[email protected]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 03:50, Michael Schroeder wrote:
>
> > how about adding something like this to init/do_mounts.c?
>
> It's not a bad idea, but surely you should be using the init= boot
> parameter instead of hard-coding a path.
>
> In any case, I don't think you should expect a patch to be accepted.
> There's not much point in further crufting up do_mounts.c in generic
> kernels during 2.6, until do_mounts moves completely out of the kernel.
> Some people are happy enough with root=0:0, so there's not obviously a
> consensus about which stopgap measure will do for now.
>
I think it's useful to maintain bass-ackwards compatibility with
root=, especially since if any hack is put it now, it creates new
legacy.
Looking for init, or linuxrc, inside the initramfs makes sense. It
should *NOT* be tied to the init= option, though... consider when all
of this is pulled out of kernel space; you don't want "init=" to break
finding your RAID volumes when you're trying to find a different
"real" init binary.
Having a kinit= option (or earlyinit= or whatever, kinit seems to be
the term we have been using) would be another matter, of course.
-hpa
--
<[email protected]> at work, <[email protected]> in private!
If you send me mail in HTML format I will assume it's spam.
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:32:34PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I think it's useful to maintain bass-ackwards compatibility with
> root=, especially since if any hack is put it now, it creates new
> legacy.
>
> Looking for init, or linuxrc, inside the initramfs makes sense. It
> should *NOT* be tied to the init= option, though... consider when all
> of this is pulled out of kernel space; you don't want "init=" to break
> finding your RAID volumes when you're trying to find a different
> "real" init binary.
Exactly. People may want to change the root partition with a
root= option, so reserving root=0:0 to flag kinit booting is
IMHO a bad idea. And init=/bin/bash should provide the user
with a mounted root.
So, how's the following patch:
--- init/do_mounts.c.orig 2003-11-12 12:49:12.000000000 +0100
+++ init/do_mounts.c 2003-11-14 17:33:49.000000000 +0100
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include "do_mounts.h"
extern int get_filesystem_list(char * buf);
+extern asmlinkage long sys_access(const char * filename, int mode);
int __initdata rd_doload; /* 1 = load RAM disk, 0 = don't load */
@@ -370,6 +371,17 @@
mount_block_root("/dev/root", root_mountflags);
}
+static char *kinit_command;
+
+static int __init kinit_setup(char *str)
+{
+ kinit_command = str;
+ return 1;
+}
+
+__setup("kinit=", kinit_setup);
+
+
/*
* Prepare the namespace - decide what/where to mount, load ramdisks, etc.
*/
@@ -393,6 +405,16 @@
if (initrd_load())
goto out;
+ /*
+ * check if there is an early userspace init, if yes
+ * let it do all the work
+ */
+ if (kinit_command || sys_access("/sbin/init", 0) == 0) {
+ extern char *execute_command;
+ execute_command = kinit_command ? kinit_command : 0;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
if (is_floppy && rd_doload && rd_load_disk(0))
ROOT_DEV = Root_RAM0;
It also adds a 'kinit' option for the brave users who really
want to specify a diffenent kinit, e.g. 'ash'.
Of course, the kinit program should also be changed to check
for a init=xxx parameter instead of kinit=xxx.
Cheers,
Michael.
--
Michael Schroeder [email protected]
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}