Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759115Ab3CGEbO (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 23:31:14 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:50092 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756204Ab3CGEbN (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 23:31:13 -0500 Message-ID: <5138180B.3010503@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:31:07 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130219 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Jones CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Be explicit about what the x86 0x020c boot parameter version requires. References: <51377C3A.3030301@zytor.com> <1362592823-28967-1-git-send-email-pjones@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1362592823-28967-1-git-send-email-pjones@redhat.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1706 Lines: 44 On 03/06/2013 10:00 AM, Peter Jones wrote: > This should help avoid making the incorrect change in non-compliant > bootloaders. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Jones > --- > Documentation/x86/boot.txt | 5 +++-- > arch/x86/include/asm/bootparam_utils.h | 7 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/x86/boot.txt b/Documentation/x86/boot.txt > index 3840b6f..72702db 100644 > --- a/Documentation/x86/boot.txt > +++ b/Documentation/x86/boot.txt > @@ -1110,7 +1110,8 @@ firmware, 'table' is the EFI system table - these are the first two > arguments of the "handoff state" as described in section 2.3 of the > UEFI specification. 'bp' is the boot loader-allocated boot params. > > -The boot loader *must* fill out the following fields in bp, > +The boot loader *must* zero the entirity of bp, and then fill out the > +following fields: > > o hdr.code32_start > o hdr.cmd_line_ptr > @@ -1118,4 +1119,4 @@ The boot loader *must* fill out the following fields in bp, > o hdr.ramdisk_image (if applicable) > o hdr.ramdisk_size (if applicable) > Wait a bloody minute here... I seem to have managed to miss something big. Matt, should we not be copying the setup part of the structure just as we do for the normal 32/64-bit protocol? If not, why not? -- 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/