So, let me first add, the comment can be removed as needed. Comments offered only for clarification.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 1:40 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > But what do you mean UEFI "consumes" initrd= ? What I mean is, there are bootloaders that will, if they see initrd= in the command line, remove it: the kernel will never see it. > I guess looking at > Documentation/x86/boot.rst is where treating initrd= as a file that > should be handled and ramdisk_image / ramdisk_size set came from. I do > wonder what happens in the case of ARM/ARM64 + UEFI without device tree. it is possible that the initrd= argument will not be seen by the kernel. That's my understanding. Will this be a problem if so? It would be for me :-) > And it doesn't provide any sort of link / context to the > boot loader specification project or similar that explains the cases > when a non-filename "initrd=" would reasonably (or unreasonably but > happens in reality) be removed. But it unreasonably happens as I learned the hard way :-) Anyway, thanks Tom, I have no objections to whatever you all feel is best to do with that comment. It was a failed attempt on my part to explain the state of things :-) ron