> I don't doubt you have a good reason to want it, I'm just not clear on why an
> initramfs isn't an option? You have this special kernel with your special
> option, and you manage to get these things to boot your special kernel right?
> So why is a initramfs with a tiny nbd-client binary in there
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:14 PM Eric Blake wrote:
>
> On 6/13/19 9:45 AM, Roman Stratiienko wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Just throw nbd-client in your initramfs. Every nbd server has it's own
> >> handshake protocol, embedding one particular servers handshake protocol
> >> into the
> >> kernel isn't the a
On 6/13/19 8:02 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 6/12/19 11:31 AM, roman.stratiie...@globallogic.com wrote:
>> From: Roman Stratiienko
>>
>> Adding support to nbd to use it as a root device. This code essentially
>> provides a minimal nbd-client implementation within the kernel. It opens
>> a socket and
On 6/13/19 9:45 AM, Roman Stratiienko wrote:
>>
>> Just throw nbd-client in your initramfs. Every nbd server has it's own
>> handshake protocol, embedding one particular servers handshake protocol into
>> the
>> kernel isn't the answer here. Thanks,
The handshake protocol is well-specified:
ht
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 07:31:44PM +0300, roman.stratiie...@globallogic.com
wrote:
> From: Roman Stratiienko
>
> Adding support to nbd to use it as a root device. This code essentially
> provides a minimal nbd-client implementation within the kernel. It opens
> a socket and makes the negotiation
5 matches
Mail list logo
