On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 05:02:55PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 01/31/2011 03:02 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >Currently linuxboot.bin and multiboot.bin option roms override int19
> >vector to intercept boot process. No sane option rom should do that.
> >Provide bev entry instead that will be ca
On 01/31/2011 03:02 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Currently linuxboot.bin and multiboot.bin option roms override int19
vector to intercept boot process. No sane option rom should do that.
Provide bev entry instead that will be called by BIOS if option rom
is selected for booting.
Signed-off-by: Gleb N
On 31.01.2011, at 12:50, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:41:46PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
>> The idea behind the OPTION_ROM and BOOT_ROM split was to have a generic
>> header that can be used as template for random option roms or boot roms
>
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:41:46PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> The idea behind the OPTION_ROM and BOOT_ROM split was to have a generic
> header that can be used as template for random option roms or boot roms
> alike. Your patch munges those two use-cases toget
On 31.01.2011, at 10:02, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> Currently linuxboot.bin and multiboot.bin option roms override int19
> vector to intercept boot process. No sane option rom should do that.
> Provide bev entry instead that will be called by BIOS if option rom
> is selected for booting.
>
> Signed-o
Currently linuxboot.bin and multiboot.bin option roms override int19
vector to intercept boot process. No sane option rom should do that.
Provide bev entry instead that will be called by BIOS if option rom
is selected for booting.
Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
---
Note that this patch should be ap
