Re: gPXE scripts and boot module order

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Michael Brown<[email protected]> wrote:
> All correct.  It's arguable that we should change the behaviour so that
> instead of sorting the module list in-situ, we should copy them down below
> the umalloc()ed area so that we can present the loaded OS with a list of
> modules that are both in ascending order (which is needed for some OSes) and
> also in load order (which would avoid surprising users in this way).
>
> The downside of doing this is that it would break any existing setups using
> gPXE's multiboot loader, since those setups must already be reversing the
> module order.  We could mitigate this problem by bumping the version number
> for our multiboot support to
>
>  FEATURE ( FEATURE_IMAGE, "Multiboot", DHCP_EB_FEATURE_MULTIBOOT, 2 );
>
> I'm open to argument either way.  Thoughts?

I will write a patch for this; it could solve the modules memory map
problem we currently have with multiboot.  Solaris expects multiboot
modules to be within the usable memory map regions whereas they are
currently excluded.

I think we can do something similar to what the bzimage loader does
for initrds using prep_segment().

Stefan

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july