> =20
> - Low memory heap (useful to move code off kern/i386/pc/startup.S)=
=2E
> =20
Originally I thought of a path relocator32->relocator users->mm
relocator32 is ready for next round of review but is untested. Now I=
think about it mm patch isn't actually depen
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 09:35:37PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Actually I don't understand why it was proposed to include it in 1.97
> at all - it changes memory management, bugs in it are likely to be
> critical and benefit is only smaller core. If it was up to me I would
> just
I have this "thingie" available at my git branches mm and mm+move but
it needs more testing. Unless it's tested enough it should be
postponed and not included in 1.97.
Actually I don't understand why it was proposed to include it in 1.97
at all - it changes memory management, bugs in it are likely
> But available memory is several orders of magnitude bigger than the largest
> block a loader will need. So is this really an issue?
It's not always the case. Two examples
1) Solaris. At least some distributions of solaris use a big (70 MiB
compressed, around 200 MiB compressed) initrd which has
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:45:19PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >> > - Low memory heap (useful to move code off kern/i386/pc/startup.S).
> >> Originally I thought of a path relocator32->relocator users->mm
> >> relocator32 is ready for next round of review but is untested. Now I
>
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:35:13AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 06:10:40PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > I think it's time we begin the discussion on GRUB 1.97. What do we want to
> > see in it, and a rough schedule. 1.97 is meant to be a point release,
> > without
> >
Hi Yves,
Please could you include plain text in your mail? HTML-only is difficult
to quote (see below)
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:26:47PM +0200, Yves Blusseau wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Colin Watson a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:43:34AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
>
>
>
>> > - Low memory heap (useful to move code off kern/i386/pc/startup.S).
>> Originally I thought of a path relocator32->relocator users->mm
>> relocator32 is ready for next round of review but is untested. Now I
>> think about it mm patch isn't actually dependent on relocator32, just
>> you won't
Colin Watson a écrit :
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:43:34AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 07:10:12PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
What about savedefault? Which savedefault way you prefer?
I think it would be good to
> With GOP we get access to the framebuffer which is about as good or bad as
> VBE.
GOP is supported only on UEFI 2.0, not EFI 1.10
>
> UGA is a different story. It only supports Blt (and FillRect), not
> direct access, and the the Blt data probably has to be the same format
> as the screen data.
2009/8/10 Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko :
>>
>> What is the state of graphics on EFI?
> in efi/linux.c there is a stub with a mixture of UGA and direct
> access. I would prefer to switch to own drivers since EFI tries to
> "abstract" video. Bean has GOP patch but only few mobos support it.
I have
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:41:39AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:43:34AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 07:10:12PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
> > wrote:
> > > What about savedefault? Which savedefault way you prefer?
> >
> > I think it
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:43:34AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 07:10:12PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > What about savedefault? Which savedefault way you prefer?
>
> I think it would be good to have. But I haven't followed on the savedefault
> discussio
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 06:10:40PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> I think it's time we begin the discussion on GRUB 1.97. What do we want to
> see in it, and a rough schedule. 1.97 is meant to be a point release, without
> any major changes (I mean, except for those we already have ;-)), and it
>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 07:10:12PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think it's time we begin the discussion on GRUB 1.97. What do we want to
> > see in it, and a rough schedule. 1.97 is meant to be a point re
>
> What is the state of graphics on EFI?
in efi/linux.c there is a stub with a mixture of UGA and direct
access. I would prefer to switch to own drivers since EFI tries to
"abstract" video. Bean has GOP patch but only few mobos support it.
>
> Thanks
>
> Michal
>
>
> __
2009/8/10 Robert Millan :
>
> Hi,
>
> I think it's time we begin the discussion on GRUB 1.97. What do we want to
> see in it, and a rough schedule. 1.97 is meant to be a point release, without
> any major changes (I mean, except for those we already have ;-)), and it
> should
> happen soon (like
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think it's time we begin the discussion on GRUB 1.97. What do we want to
> see in it, and a rough schedule. 1.97 is meant to be a point release, without
> any major changes (I mean, except for those we already have ;-)), and it
Hi,
I think it's time we begin the discussion on GRUB 1.97. What do we want to
see in it, and a rough schedule. 1.97 is meant to be a point release, without
any major changes (I mean, except for those we already have ;-)), and it should
happen soon (like this month or so).
Here's what I'd like
19 matches
Mail list logo
