Re: [Xen-devel] New Xen boot infrastructure proposal

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:16:30PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.05.13 at 17:01, Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > If we stick to current MBI I am not able to pass (in sensible way),
> > from preloader to __start_xen(), e.g. ACPI and EFI stuff from multiboot2
> > protocol.
> 
> Why? You get handed a list (almost like an array) of items, and you'd
> pass the base address instead of the base address of the multiboot
> structure that we pass right now, together with an indicator which
> of the two it is. Then __start_xen() has to adopt its behavior to this.
> Not a big deal afaict.

Won't you have to do a bunch of 'if (multibootv1) { use_this_offset } else
if (multibootv2) { use this other offset }' in the code to support
both formats?

If we just have a mesh of both of them we only have to do this sort
of copying only once and can just use the struct that encompasses
v2, v1, and whatever else we need (say pointer to RSDT).

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel