Re: 2.6 early userspace init

From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Thu Nov 13 2003 - 16:33:37 EST


Followup to: <1068655518.14435.37.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
By author: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 03:50, Michael Schroeder wrote:
>
> > how about adding something like this to init/do_mounts.c?
>
> It's not a bad idea, but surely you should be using the init= boot
> parameter instead of hard-coding a path.
>
> In any case, I don't think you should expect a patch to be accepted.
> There's not much point in further crufting up do_mounts.c in generic
> kernels during 2.6, until do_mounts moves completely out of the kernel.
> Some people are happy enough with root=0:0, so there's not obviously a
> consensus about which stopgap measure will do for now.
>

I think it's useful to maintain bass-ackwards compatibility with
root=, especially since if any hack is put it now, it creates new
legacy.

Looking for init, or linuxrc, inside the initramfs makes sense. It
should *NOT* be tied to the init= option, though... consider when all
of this is pulled out of kernel space; you don't want "init=" to break
finding your RAID volumes when you're trying to find a different
"real" init binary.

Having a kinit= option (or earlyinit= or whatever, kinit seems to be
the term we have been using) would be another matter, of course.

-hpa
--
<hpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> at work, <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> in private!
If you send me mail in HTML format I will assume it's spam.
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/