From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754513AbZCKREy (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:04:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753045AbZCKREo (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:04:44 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:56412 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751858AbZCKREn (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:04:43 -0400 Message-ID: <49B7EEEA.3080203@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:03:38 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Woody Suwalski CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: x86: removing zImage support? References: <49B703D4.1000008@zytor.com> <49B7C729.5080301@xandros.com> In-Reply-To: <49B7C729.5080301@xandros.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Woody Suwalski wrote: >> > If x86-only - OK. > > However zImage is the format used on ARM quite often... So any "kernel > complexity removal" need to happen only on x86 side. > I have no idea about ARM zImage... the whole zImage vs bzImage is pretty x86-specific in the first place, so yes, I was referring to x86 specifically. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.