[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2Marco Gerards
|
From: |
Ruslan Nikolaev |
|
Subject: |
Re: 2Marco Gerards |
|
Date: |
Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:47:25 -0700 (PDT) |
> Why can't you test for the regparam=3 bug?
Because it requires to build 32-bit file. As I said before this patch will work even the OS can't load 32-bit executables at all. I'm not sure about compiling it as a 64-bit file because it generates another code; moreover x86_64 accepts regparam=6. Perhaps it would detect bug... but who knows?
> ...
> But I am not sure if we want a 64 bits multiboot and what is involved
> with changing multiboot that way. I leave that to Okuji.
I can't understand what you mean. If it is support for ELF64 multiboot then it already presents in GRUB (see multiboot.c file).
If it is ELF64 multiboot & switching to 64-bit mode then it is MISTAKE because it requires enabling paging and it's not clear at all.
If it is 64-bit version of GRUB utilities then my patch already provides it
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
- [PATCH] new patch for amd64, Ruslan Nikolaev, 2005/09/20
- Re: [PATCH] new patch for amd64, Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2005/09/21
- Re: [PATCH] new patch for amd64, Marco Gerards, 2005/09/21
- Re: 2Marco Gerards,
Ruslan Nikolaev <=
- Re: 2Marco Gerards (new), Ruslan Nikolaev, 2005/09/21
- Re: 2Marco Gerards (new), Marco Gerards, 2005/09/22
- Re: 2Marco Gerards (important info), Ruslan Nikolaev, 2005/09/22
- Re: 2Marco Gerards (important info), Marco Gerards, 2005/09/23
- Re: 2Marco Gerards (answer), Ruslan Nikolaev, 2005/09/24