>>> On 26.08.16 at 16:53, <s.mun...@whatever-company.com> wrote: >> I'm not sure. I'd like to see the current logic altered as little as >> possible, and what you suggest above is more than that minimum. > > Then, that would be more like the very first patch I posted but just > change the 0x1000 low limit to 0x4000.
I thought I had made clear that I think this then ought to be 0x1050. >> So another question: Can you >> detect whether we get booted from Linux (i.e. do they provide >> any kind of identification anywhere)? > > The multiboot info struct has the boot loader name optional field and > kexec does fill it with "kexec x.y.z". Perhaps better to simply ignore the two BDA values in that special case then? Andrew, what do you think? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
