Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751227AbWEEWAe (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 18:00:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751790AbWEEWAe (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 18:00:34 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.169]:27932 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751227AbWEEWAd (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 18:00:33 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=sVQa7CpS0llXqar4RnV0FJ52vI3+RR3Kl9Pqk7e1x8ZpiBnezR9IT6meKAzGniHRhNoLygjD4b5r6Z5LZkxD084Gbd08iHqXMGhBd4wHjxYf2W2+mn2zq6++fL33T/hMalzasXtd2Y1SC3oLkt0F/5mH4dOGmLbaLmRyMQtsBEY= Message-ID: <445BCB8F.2070908@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 01:02:55 +0300 From: Alon Bar-Lev User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Coffman CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Barry K. Nathan" , Adrian Bunk , tony.luck@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH][TAKE 4] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit References: <445B5524.2090001@gmail.com> <445B5C92.5070401@zytor.com> <445B610A.7020009@gmail.com> <445B62AC.90600@zytor.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060505110517.036df928@pop-server.san.rr.com> <445B96D2.9070301@zytor.com> <6.2.3.4.0.20060505144445.03642988@pop-server.san.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060505144445.03642988@pop-server.san.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1060 Lines: 30 John Coffman wrote: > Just re-compiling LILO with the COMMAND_LINE_SIZE parameter changed > from 256 to 512 will not work. A .bss area must be moved to avoid > clobbering the kernel header. Hello John, The COMMAND_LINE_SIZE should be fixed 256 bytes for boot protocol < 2.02. For boot protocol >= 2.02 it can be null terminated 256 and up. >From LILO code I can see that COMMAND_LINE_SIZE is defined in lilo.h, so I don't understand how a change in the COMMAND_LINE_SIZE of the kernel affect LILO. What we want to achieve is a kernel capable of accepting command line size greater than 256 bytes... It is OK if LILO will still pass 256 byte buffer as it already does. Can you think of a reason why LILO will not work if we do that? (lilo.h keeps #define COMMAND_LINE_SIZE 256). Best Regards, Alon Bar-Lev. - 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/