On 16.12.19 12:24, Thomas Huth wrote: > Note: I've marked the patch as RFC since I'm not quite sure whether > this is really the right way to address this issue: It's unfortunate > that we have to mess with different location in ZIPL which might also > change again in the future. As suggested by Christian on IRC last week, > maybe it would make more sense to change ZIPL to add this parameter > already when zipl is installed (i.e. by the Linux userspace "zipl" pro- > gram), instead of adding it during boot time? Also, the BOOT_IMAGE para- > meter on s390x is quite different from the BOOT_IMAGE paramter that is > used on x86 - while s390x only uses one single number here, the x86 > variant (added by grub2, I guess) uses the boot device + full filename > of the kernel on the boot partition. Should we maybe make the s390x > variant more conform to x86? If so, I think this really has to be fixed > in zipl userspace tool, and not in the s390-ccw bios (and zipl stage3 > bootloader). Yes, I actually think we should revisit the whole BOOT_IMAGE scheme on s390. Maybe we should use the kernel name, or the name of the boot menu entry. And maybe we should not use 0 (when the default is running) but instead really use to what 0 points to.
