mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix i486 boot failure due to stale %ds
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 16:23:11 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0711041615380.15101@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0711041600280.15101@woody.linux-foundation.org>



On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> So I'd suggest having both jumps back-to-back, but realistically, the 
> first regular short jump is actually the one that is more important. 
> That's the one that really matters on i386/i486 class machines, and later 
> CPU's will generally do the right thing even with _neither_ jump there.

That's obviously badly phrased.

The far jump is obviously required on all CPU's in order for us to 
actually finally get to 32-bit protected mode and reload CS, but what I 
*meant* was that we certainly also know that "unreal mode" works and is 
used by various strange DOS extenders, and that not doing the far jump 
isn't really required for having a "working setup" - it's just going to be 
a rather limited mode.

So the short jump is required for the code to *work*. The long jump is 
required only to get us the 32-bit mode we *want* and out of the odd 
"half-way" state. Two different issues.

		Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-05  0:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-04 21:58 Mikael Pettersson
2007-11-04 22:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-04 23:05 ` Andi Kleen
2007-11-04 23:07 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-11-04 23:12   ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-04 23:50   ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-05  0:15     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-11-05  0:23       ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-11-04 23:51   ` H. Peter Anvin
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-11-05  1:18 Mikael Pettersson
2007-11-04 19:38 Mikael Pettersson
2007-11-04 19:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-04 16:44 Mikael Pettersson
2007-11-04 18:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-04 19:00   ` H. Peter Anvin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.0.999.0711041615380.15101@woody.linux-foundation.org \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikpe@it.uu.se \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®