Magnus Damm wrote: > But doesn't this mean that we can treat x86_64 and ia64 in a similar > fashion? Maybe just by adding a PT_LOAD program header for the kernel > segment?
> How does ia64 support differ from x86_64? Would having a separate > PT_LOAD segment > for the kernel work for both ia64 and x86_64? Together with the ram > segments of course. > > Oh, but if we ever want to support relocatable kernels on i386 then we > would need a separate one there too, right? > > Yes, yes, and no... Relocatable x86_64 kernels require a separate PT_LOAD segment describing the __START_KERNEL_map region. IA64 kernels (already relocatable) require a separate PT_LOAD segment describing the KERNEL_START region mapped into region 5. We already are supporting/using relocatable i386 kernels, but they do not require an additional PT_LOAD segment. (The only caveat is that crash will not work on the second, "kdump instantiation" of the relocatable kernel, but we don't care about that one.) Dave
_______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
