On 16.12.2019 12:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 16.12.19 12:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> Note: I've marked the patch as RFC since I'm not quite sure whether
>> this is really the right way to address this issue: It's unfortunate
>> that we have to mess with different location in ZIPL
On 16/12/2019 13.15, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
[...]
> I just learned from Peter that booting SCSI also has no BOOT_IMAGE (as
> we have no menu). So Thomas, can you find out the use case for the initial
> bug report. That might give an indication on how to proceed for all cases.
Apparently
On 16.12.19 13:09, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:29:24 +0100
> Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>> On 16.12.19 12:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> Note: I've marked the patch as RFC since I'm not quite sure whether
>>> this is really the right way to address this issue: It's
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:29:24 +0100
Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 16.12.19 12:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > Note: I've marked the patch as RFC since I'm not quite sure whether
> > this is really the right way to address this issue: It's unfortunate
> > that we have to mess with different
On 16.12.19 12:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
> Note: I've marked the patch as RFC since I'm not quite sure whether
> this is really the right way to address this issue: It's unfortunate
> that we have to mess with different location in ZIPL which might also
> change again in the future. As
ZIPL adds a "BOOT_IMAGE=x" to the kernel parameters to indicate which
kernel entry has been chosen during the boot process. Apparently some
Linux tools like "dracut" use this setting, so we should provide this
kernel parameter with the s390-ccw bios, too.
However, it's a little bit tricky to get
