[Top] [All Lists]

Re: head.S and init_task.c vs addinitrd

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Subject: Re: head.S and init_task.c vs addinitrd
From: Guido Guenther <>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 15:43:15 +0200
In-reply-to: <>; from on Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:49:11PM +0200
Mail-followup-to: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>,
References: <20020413192811.GA25750@bogon.ms20.nix> <>
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:49:11PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, Guido Guenther wrote:
> > some of the recent head.S/init_task.c changes break addinitrd. In 2.4.16
> > we had two segments which allowed elf2ecoff to put everything (besides
> > bss) into one text section (dropping REGINFO) in the ecoff image leaving
> > the data section emtpy. Addinitrd then later merged the initial ramdisk
> > into that empty data section.
>  Hmm, isn't that broken?  I believe an initial RAM disk should be added to
> an ELF image, before converting it to ECOFF.  Not everyone uses ECOFF and
> ELF is the "canonical" executable format for Linux.  Everything else is a
> derivative.
But we currently don't support relinking the ELF kernel to add a ramdisk,
do we [1]? Elf2ecoff/addinitrd is the only way I know of to achieve this
and I still don't understand why the recent init_task.c/head.S changes
where necessary which broke this.
 -- Guido

[1] I know that one can link a ramdisk into the ELF image but this
ramdisk hat to be available at kernel compile time which is not an option in
many situations(e.g. Debian "boot-floppies").

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>