From: Ducrot B. <du...@po...> - 2003-05-22 13:31:40
|
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 12:40:52PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Iau, 2003-05-22 at 08:48, Grover, Andrew wrote: > > can load individual modules. The limitations of lilo should not be taken > > to be the limitations of all boot loaders. lilo is the lowest common > > denominator loader, and while we want Linux to work with it, Linux could > > work *better* if we took advantage of grub's additional capabilities. > > On a lot of non x86 platforms Lilo is considerably more featureful. > Initrd basically exists as a way to take an arbitary bootloader and feed > it stuff. In some cases the tools even nail the initrd onto the end of > the binary because the boot loader isnt smart enough to load. I don't understand. On a lot of non x86 lilo do not even exist (PPC <- quick or yaboot, SPARC <- silo) etc. > > > What this enables is not only an elimination of the hassle of initrd, it > > enables previously unmodularizable things like ACPI, or PCI, or all the > > special code needed for x86 subarchs, or whatever other code that one > > machine needs (highmem?) but that most do not to now be modularized. > > I'm not sure it does. A lot of the stuff like handling multiple system > variants requires you are able to handle all of them until you reach a > point where you know the one you want. > > Modularisation is the key but I suspect we actually want to turn the > problem inside out. If for example all the ACPI stuff was linked into an > acpi.text and acpi.data section then we can boot, having established we > don't need acpi we can eject acpi just like we eject __init code. > > > Having the modules specified individually to the bootloader makes things > > simpler. > > Whats the difference between feedling the list to the bootloader or to > mkinitrd ? You can retrieve most hardware configuration (PnP, ACPI, etc) via a module at boot loader stage, even if kernel is not launched, not after you have access to the fs inside the initrd image. > > > Having an in-kernel linker lets previously unmodularizable code be > > modularized. > > Definitely - and Rusty has done that for 2.5.x Just a question (I have not looked). Can you preload modules or discharge them before booting kernel with 2.5 (as in FreeBSD) ? -- Ducrot Bruno -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? -- Don't know. Don't care. |