Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935025AbXHHPMX (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:12:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1765338AbXHHPL4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:11:56 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.248]:2598 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1764328AbXHHPLz (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:11:55 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=iY5jqH65n57wbfh7q+k06U0v+mCIaQ3FtcwvUfC2tYjq/HvYkS0+VygpXEA6LseIuMcbGi4m+VLNxCdyS14UmptJMlWHGg+BF1qb3cN3Dg2wcBXs3ExCK0HFfnjCVH61jgD165L2mPBWbvrr4/lslhR8c5n3IwHIA5Z4msUMOtE= Message-ID: <851fc09e0708080811l1e17255ctef617d9137a8c045@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 23:11:54 +0800 From: "huang ying" To: "Andi Kleen" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86_64 EFI support -v3: EFI document Cc: "Huang, Ying" , "Eric W. Biederman" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, "Yinghai Lu" , "Randy Dunlap" , "Chandramouli Narayanan" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200708081609.33098.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9D7649D18729DE4BB2BD7B494F7FEDC246DC2B@pdsmsx415.ccr.corp.intel.com> <200708081609.33098.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1386 Lines: 33 On 8/8/07, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Instead, elilo collects the needed information > > defined in include/asm-x86_64/bootsetup.h itself, > > That's nasty. I must have missed when we declared this a public ABI. > It's not really designed to be one. Was there public discussion on this? Maybe What I said is not clear and correct. In fact, the elilo follows the boot protocol defined in Documentation/i386/zero-page.txt, just not uses arch/(i386|x86_64)/boot/setup.S to collect the information, but collects them by elilo itself. Information in include/asm-x86_64/bootsetup.h is just a part of that in Documentation/i386/zero-page.txt. > I expect we'll have some grief from this in the future. > > If it's really done this way we should at least add a version > number and a boot loader ID like the standard boot protocol > so that bugs later can be worked around. Also some Documentation > would be good. And comments. But discussion first. > Is what defined in Documentation/i386/zero-page.txt the standard boot protocol. If it is, the elilo follows it. My previous expressing is not clear and correct. Best Regards, Huang Ying - 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/