From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759078AbYGJRSG (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:18:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753138AbYGJRRy (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:17:54 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:51101 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753329AbYGJRRx (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:17:53 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:17:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Frans Pop cc: Ian Campbell , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Anvin Subject: Re: [regression?] 2.6.26 floppy boot failure with kernel packed using 'upx' In-Reply-To: <200807100655.00857.elendil@planet.nl> Message-ID: References: <200807100655.00857.elendil@planet.nl> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LFD 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Frans Pop wrote: > > Important factor here is that we "pack" the kernel using upx [1] (in order > to fit everything on a floppy). The original (unpacked) kernel after this > commit boots fine, only a packed version fails. > We have tried upx versions 2.01, 3.01 and 3.03, all with same result. Ok, I do not consider this to be a regression. Clearly UPX is expecting a very specific kernel format, and clearly UPX just needs to be updated for the changes. That said, if some UPX person can explain what it is that UPX needs, maybe we can add some format markers into the kernel (and perhaps some extra header info) so that future format changes are transparent or at least break in obvious ways. Linus