On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Did you get chance to put them into for-x86-boot?
>>
>> You need to skip the first two about memmap= exactmap and reserveram ...
>>
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Did you get chance to put them into for-x86-boot?
>
> You need to skip the first two about memmap= exactmap and reserveram ...
>
put updated version in
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
>>On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> I'm planning to sort it out... I'll let you know if I run out of
>>bandwidth.
>>>
>>> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:19 AM
Thanks.
Yinghai Lu wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I'm planning to sort it out... I'll let you know if I run out of
>bandwidth.
>>
>> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:19 AM, H. Peter Anvin
>wrote:
I think we can probably do that,
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I'm planning to sort it out... I'll let you know if I run out of bandwidth.
>
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
>>On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:19 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>>
>>> I think we can probably do that, since it doesn't affect anything
>>non-
On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 11:19 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> It turns out the patch I sent out doesn't actually build. Here is an
> updated patch. Can I get your ack for this so I can do the
> appropriate hacks to your and Yinghai's patchsets?
The new flags are supposed to indicate that the EFI s
I'm planning to sort it out... I'll let you know if I run out of bandwidth.
Yinghai Lu wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:19 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>
>> I think we can probably do that, since it doesn't affect anything
>non-broken
>> at this point. I'm sorting out what can be done for 3.8
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:19 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> I think we can probably do that, since it doesn't affect anything non-broken
> at this point. I'm sorting out what can be done for 3.8 vs 3.9 at this
> point.
>
> Anyway, as you can tell I'm spending this weekend working for a reason.
>
On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 11:19 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> It turns out the patch I sent out doesn't actually build. Here is an
> updated patch. Can I get your ack for this so I can do the appropriate
> hacks to your and Yinghai's patchsets?
>
> -hpa
>
Acked-by: Matt Fleming
--
To u
On 01/27/2013 11:10 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 11:02 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
This is intentionally a protocol only patch, which may be possible to
push into 3.8 as an urgent patch. David, if I understand our
discussions right it might be better to not export XLF_EFI_H
On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 11:02 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> This is intentionally a protocol only patch, which may be possible to
> push into 3.8 as an urgent patch. David, if I understand our
> discussions right it might be better to not export XLF_EFI_HANDOFF_32
> at this time?
That won't stop
Hi guys,
This is what I would like to do for bzImage 2.12. This is *different*
than either one of you have, but it should be a unification of both...
please let me know if you have any objections as soon as possible.
This is intentionally a protocol only patch, which may be possible to
12 matches
Mail list logo
