This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-ia64-devel] RE: [PATCH] Patch for loading module[2of2]

To: "Yang, Fred" <fred.yang@xxxxxxxxx>, "Xu, Anthony" <anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] RE: [PATCH] Patch for loading module[2of2]
From: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 16:13:51 -0700
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 23:11:27 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-topic: [PATCH] Patch for loading module[2of2]
> > Um, why?  Changing something this fundamental doesn't seem
> > like a good idea.  Could you please resubmit the patch
> > to change the meaning of the parameters back?
> Using initrd to load Linux kernel image is only a temporally 
> workround and should be corrected.  There is no backward 
> compability issue on Xen/ia64 on loading kernel image per se. 
>  Rather, "initrd" should be maintained to load "initrd" 
> maintains the backward compability with current elilo.efi.  
> The "module" add-on is to continue to maintain elilo compability
> Imaging a single elilo.conf to have multi-initrd with two 
> different meanings, this is definitely to confuse users.  

I suppose that's a reasonable argument, though I don't agree
that your changed parameter names are any less confusing than
the original way: "module" is hardly a parameter name for
the domain0 image.

Maybe the right answer is for elilo to allow a "domain0="
parameter name, which could be an alias for "module=".
I'm not sure the elilo maintainers would like that,
but it would certainly be the least confusing alternative.

This might be a good topic for a poll... we now have over
70 people on this list.  Let's ask (see next message).

> > Yes with the parameters swapped it does seem to work,
> > at least as far as trying to mount the root disk.
> > (I don't yet have a combination of a non-rhel kernel
> > and non-rhel initrd that boots.)
> As indicated in the previous mail.  The patch only validated 
> to get to initrd, but a corresponding initrd to match with 
> xenlinux is yet to be built because no initrd is built from the tree.

Yes, I meant I haven't yet gotten RHEL4 to boot (even without
Xen) with a kernel.org kernel.


Xen-ia64-devel mailing list