Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:51:36AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I'm making coffee now. I just don't see what I missed? Maybe you were
>>> led astray by the new PARAM_VESA_PAD I added?
>>>
>> Again, I object to
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:51:36AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm making coffee now. I just don't see what I missed? Maybe you were
> > led astray by the new PARAM_VESA_PAD I added?
> >
>
> Again, I object to changing a documented interface
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'm making coffee now. I just don't see what I missed? Maybe you were
> led astray by the new PARAM_VESA_PAD I added?
>
Again, I object to changing a documented interface when it's not
necessary to do so. Just declare the structure packed.
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 10:30 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 5 May 2007
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum <[EMAIL
> > > PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 10:54 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
> > > diff --git
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
> > diff --git a/arch/i386/boot/video.S b/arch/i386/boot/video.S
> > index 8143c95..8e404cb
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
diff --git a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
diff --git a/arch/i386/boot/video.S b/arch/i386/boot/video.S
index 8143c95..8e404cb 100644
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 10:54 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
diff --git a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
diff --git
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
---
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 10:30 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:04:07AM +0800, Antonino A. Daplas wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Hi!
I'm making coffee now. I just don't see what I missed? Maybe you were
led astray by the new PARAM_VESA_PAD I added?
Again, I object to changing a documented interface when it's not
necessary to do so. Just declare the structure packed.
-hpa
-
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:51:36AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Hi!
I'm making coffee now. I just don't see what I missed? Maybe you were
led astray by the new PARAM_VESA_PAD I added?
Again, I object to changing a documented interface when it's not
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:51:36AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Hi!
I'm making coffee now. I just don't see what I missed? Maybe you were
led astray by the new PARAM_VESA_PAD I added?
Again, I object to changing a documented
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > --- a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
> > > +++ b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:45:47AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
>>> Oh! A padding hole in a struct! That could be a problem. If the freeze
>>> is after decompression, could you test if this makes it work again?
>>>
>> The correct fix
On Tue, 8 May 2007 20:32:32 +0200
Alexander van Heukelum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > --- a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
> > > +++
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:45:47AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> >
> > Oh! A padding hole in a struct! That could be a problem. If the freeze
> > is after decompression, could you test if this makes it work again?
> >
>
> The correct fix is to apply
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
>
> Oh! A padding hole in a struct! That could be a problem. If the freeze
> is after decompression, could you test if this makes it work again?
>
The correct fix is to apply __attribute__((packed)) to this structure.
Of course, changing the boot sector will cause
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
> > +++ b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
> > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ #endif
> > _start:
> >
> > # Normalize the
Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Without patch:
>
> (gdb) x/20i _start
> 0x0 <_start>: ljmpw $0x0,$0x8
> 0x6 <_start+6>: rolb $0x8c,(%edi)
> 0x9 : enter $0xd88e,$0x8e
> 0xd : rorb $0xfb,0x7c00bcd0(%esi)
> 0x14 : cld
> 0x15 : mov$0x20ac0031,%esi
> 0x1a : (bad)
> 0x1b :
On Tue, 08 May 2007 04:25:00 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> >>
> >># Normalize the start address
> >> - jmpl$BOOTSEG, $start2
> >> + jmpw$BOOTSEG, $start2
> >
> > Sigh, another blow struck in the ongoing struggle between my Vaio and
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> You should have put that into a different mail (is there a electron shortage
> somewhere now? @) Ok, thanks for the well researched bug report. Will fix
> in
> my tree.
>
Nah. Just a brain shortage at 5 in the morning.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list:
On Tuesday 08 May 2007 13:25, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >># Normalize the start address
> >> - jmpl$BOOTSEG, $start2
> >> + jmpw$BOOTSEG, $start2
> >
> > Sigh, another blow struck in the ongoing struggle between my Vaio and the
> > rest of the world.
> >
> >
Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> # Normalize the start address
>> -jmpl$BOOTSEG, $start2
>> +jmpw$BOOTSEG, $start2
>
> Sigh, another blow struck in the ongoing struggle between my Vaio and the
> rest of the world.
>
> Stone-cold black-screen lockup immediately upon boot.
>
>
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The x86 bzImage contains a stub to inform people that it is not possible
> any more to run a Linux kernel by catting it to a floppy and then
> booting from it. This was meant to be all 16-bit code. The first
>
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The x86 bzImage contains a stub to inform people that it is not possible
any more to run a Linux kernel by catting it to a floppy and then
booting from it. This was meant to be all 16-bit code. The first
Andrew Morton wrote:
# Normalize the start address
-jmpl$BOOTSEG, $start2
+jmpw$BOOTSEG, $start2
Sigh, another blow struck in the ongoing struggle between my Vaio and the
rest of the world.
Stone-cold black-screen lockup immediately upon boot.
Stock FC5
On Tuesday 08 May 2007 13:25, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
# Normalize the start address
- jmpl$BOOTSEG, $start2
+ jmpw$BOOTSEG, $start2
Sigh, another blow struck in the ongoing struggle between my Vaio and the
rest of the world.
Stone-cold black-screen
Andi Kleen wrote:
You should have put that into a different mail (is there a electron shortage
somewhere now? @) Ok, thanks for the well researched bug report. Will fix
in
my tree.
Nah. Just a brain shortage at 5 in the morning.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Tue, 08 May 2007 04:25:00 -0700 H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
# Normalize the start address
- jmpl$BOOTSEG, $start2
+ jmpw$BOOTSEG, $start2
Sigh, another blow struck in the ongoing struggle between my Vaio and the
rest of the
Andrew Morton wrote:
Without patch:
(gdb) x/20i _start
0x0 _start: ljmpw $0x0,$0x8
0x6 _start+6: rolb $0x8c,(%edi)
0x9 start2+1: enter $0xd88e,$0x8e
0xd start2+5: rorb $0xfb,0x7c00bcd0(%esi)
0x14 start2+12: cld
0x15 start2+13: mov$0x20ac0031,%esi
0x1a
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
+++ b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ #endif
_start:
# Normalize the start address
-
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Oh! A padding hole in a struct! That could be a problem. If the freeze
is after decompression, could you test if this makes it work again?
The correct fix is to apply __attribute__((packed)) to this structure.
Of course, changing the boot sector will cause
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:45:47AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Oh! A padding hole in a struct! That could be a problem. If the freeze
is after decompression, could you test if this makes it work again?
The correct fix is to apply __attribute__((packed))
On Tue, 8 May 2007 20:32:32 +0200
Alexander van Heukelum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
--- a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
+++
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:45:47AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Oh! A padding hole in a struct! That could be a problem. If the freeze
is after decompression, could you test if this makes it work again?
The correct fix is to apply
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:32 +0200, Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:28:17AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007 12:44:52 +0200 Alexander van Heukelum [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
--- a/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
+++ b/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
@@ -44,7
Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The x86 bzImage contains a stub to inform people that it is not possible
> any more to run a Linux kernel by catting it to a floppy and then
> booting from it. This was meant to be all 16-bit code. The first
>
Hi!
The x86 bzImage contains a stub to inform people that it is not possible
any more to run a Linux kernel by catting it to a floppy and then
booting from it. This was meant to be all 16-bit code. The first
instruction, however, ended up as being coded as a 16:32-bit far jump. I
assume the
Hi!
The x86 bzImage contains a stub to inform people that it is not possible
any more to run a Linux kernel by catting it to a floppy and then
booting from it. This was meant to be all 16-bit code. The first
instruction, however, ended up as being coded as a 16:32-bit far jump. I
assume the
Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
Hi!
The x86 bzImage contains a stub to inform people that it is not possible
any more to run a Linux kernel by catting it to a floppy and then
booting from it. This was meant to be all 16-bit code. The first
42 matches
Mail list logo