Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:41:00 -0700
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CAP6exYJj5n8tLibwnAPA554ax9gjUFvyMntCx4OYULUOknWQ0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP6exY+LnUXaOVRZUXmi2wajCPZoJVMFFAwbCzN3YywWyhi8ZA@mail.gmail.com> <D31718CF-1755-4846-8043-6E62D57E4937@zytor.com> <CAP6exYJHgqsNq84DCjgNP=nOjp1Aud9J5JAiEZMXe=+dtm-QGA@mail.gmail.com> <8E80838A-7A3F-4600-AF58-923EDA3DE91D@zytor.com> <CACdnJusmAHJYauKvHEXNZKaUWPqZoabB_pSn5WokSy_gOnRtTw@mail.gmail.com> <A814A71D-0450-4724-885B-859BCD2B7CBD@zytor.com> <CAP6exYJdCzG5EOPB9uaWz+uG-KKt+j7aJMGMfqqD3vthco_Y_g@mail.gmail.com> <CF1457CD-0BE2-4806-9703-E99146218BEC@zytor.com> <CAP6exYJj5n8tLibwnAPA554ax9gjUFvyMntCx4OYULUOknWQ0g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86 support for the initrd= command line option
To:     ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
CC:     Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE..." <x86@kernel.org>,
        lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
From:   hpa@zytor.com
Message-ID: <C2B3BE61-665A-47FD-87E0-BDB5C30CEFF4@zytor.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On March 23, 2020 12:40:15 PM PDT, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail=2Ecom> wrote=
:
>I'm wondering -- adding initrdmem=3D is easy, do you think we'll ever be
>able to end uses of initrd=3D in the ARM and MIPS world? Is it ok to
>have these two identical command line parameters? I'm guessing just
>changing initrd=3D would be hard=2E
>
>Do we just accept initrd=3D from this day forward, as well as initrdmem=
=3D?
>
>On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 12:06 PM <hpa@zytor=2Ecom> wrote:
>>
>> On March 23, 2020 11:54:28 AM PDT, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail=2Ecom>
>wrote:
>> >On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 11:19 AM <hpa@zytor=2Ecom> wrote:
>> >> Pointing to any number of memory chunks via setup_data works and
>> >doesn't need to be exposed to the user, but I guess the above is
>> >reasonable=2E
>> >
>> >so, good to go?
>> >
>> >>
>> >> *However*, I would also suggest adding "initrdmem=3D" across
>> >architectures that doesn't have the ambiguity=2E
>> >
>> >agreed=2E I can look at doing that next=2E
>> >
>> >ron
>>
>> I would prefer if we could put both into the same patchset=2E
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=
=2E

Yes, accept both=2E
--=20
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E