On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:24:28PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 09/05/2016 18:48, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > Of course we're well outside any standards here. Can we tell clang > > users to use the GCC/pre-compiled option ROMs :-? Any other ideas? I > > don't think I've missed a flag (GCC has -fno-toplevel-reorder, but > > clang 3.8 doesn't ...) > > I guess the checksumming script (scripts/signrom.py) could take care of > padding the file to a multiple of 512 bytes, and fill in the size in the > third byte. Then "_end" would not be necessary anymore and -m16 could > replace the .code16 directive.
In my rather limited testing on gcc, gcc -m16 broke booting. However I've not investigated this further. I'll do so shortly. However I have a question: is there a formal standard or documentation for the option ROM format? Are we sticking to the (ancient) "BIOS Boot Specification" or is there something newer? (My copy is from 1996). Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
