"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Sure. >> >> Peter do we want to use the bootloader byte and assign lguest it's own >> bootloader type or do we want to add another field specific to >> paravirtualized environments? >> > > The bootloader byte is already a bit too overused; I'm a little scared > that we're going to run out of boot loader IDs as it is. > > We probably should add another field, and while we're at it maybe we > should add a boot loader extension field. A dedicated subarchitecture field would make sense. One of the pieces that would be nice is if we could detect other non paravirt subarchitectures. James is there a reasonable way to detect voyager at boot time? So we could potentially have a generic kernel that can also boot on voyager? Eric _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
