Re: [RFC] multiboot ammendment firmware info

2009-09-04 Thread Seth Goldberg
Quoting Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko, who wrote the following on Tue, 1...: Hello I propose to define following additional structures for multiboot: If flags[11] is set the field in addresses 88-95 contains an address of RSDT as defined in ACPI specification If flags[12] is set the field in a

Re: [RFC] multiboot ammendment firmware info

2009-09-04 Thread Seth Goldberg
Remark 2: In case of EFI booter has to call EfiExitBootServices Another subject for discussion - if OS wants to make calls to EFI from protected mode it has to call set_virtual_address_map and for this it needs information about memory occupied by firmware do we add an additional pointer which

Re: [RFC] multiboot ammendment firmware info

2009-09-01 Thread Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Isaac Dupree wrote: > Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: >>> >>> If flags[13] is set 2 fields are defined on addresses 104-107 resp >>> 108-116 >>> First field is firmware type >> >> 2 - BIOS. 16-bit mode BIOS interrupts are available. Second field is >> invalid >>

Re: [RFC] multiboot ammendment firmware info

2009-09-01 Thread Isaac Dupree
Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: If flags[13] is set 2 fields are defined on addresses 104-107 resp 108-116 First field is firmware type 2 - BIOS. 16-bit mode BIOS interrupts are available. Second field is invalid 5 - 32-bit EFI. Second field contains pointer to EFI system table. What abou

Re: [RFC] multiboot ammendment firmware info

2009-09-01 Thread Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > Hello I propose to define following additional structures for multiboot: > If flags[11] is set the field in addresses 88-95 contains an address > of RSDT as defined in ACPI specification > If flags[12] is set the field in addres