https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=411068
User bugproxy@us.ibm.com added comment
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=411068#c6
--- Comment #6 from LTC BugProxy
As you mentioned, I must take into account the load-base value and the OF alignment constraints when changing the real-base value. But, as far as I could understand, the crucial point here is to ensure that the reserved space for loading the bootloader is enough, or, in other words, it must be ensured that ($real-base - $load-base) > $bootloader_size.
Sure, but the patch didn't adjust for load-base, I wanted that pointed out to prevent it being used in the short term. IIRC load-base isn't set by addnote (yet), so you can't know how far to offset to accommodate it. You can guess (or override the default with the NOTE) but at that point you're no better off than the mainline patch.
In the 'pseudo-patch' I've sent, I really didn't take into account any OF alignment constraint or load-base value (that I think it must stay unchanged). I just shifted the real-base pointer in order to increase the space for loading the bootloader correctly. What kind of alignment must I take into consideration when changing the real-base pointer? Is there an upper limit up to where I can shift the real-base value? Modifying the real-base value isn't enough?
In theory 4k alignment is adequate, but I think in practice you'd be best to align to a 1Mb boundary. You can set load-base to (IIRC) any address that is: * 1Mb aligned * Inside the RMR (usually 128Mb) * Allows room for real-size, RTAS and the decompressed kernel, above OF and below RTAS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.