From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264406AbTEJSjb (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2003 14:39:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264428AbTEJSjb (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2003 14:39:31 -0400 Received: from amsfep16-int.chello.nl ([213.46.243.26]:37400 "EHLO amsfep16-int.chello.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264406AbTEJSja (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2003 14:39:30 -0400 From: Jos Hulzink To: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use correct x86 reboot vector Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 22:55:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: Andi Kleen , torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20030510025634.GA31713@averell> <200305102141.57860.josh@stack.nl> <20030510181056.GB29682@mail.jlokier.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20030510181056.GB29682@mail.jlokier.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200305102255.57862.josh@stack.nl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 10 May 2003 20:10, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Jos Hulzink wrote: > > For the sake of bad behaving BIOSes however, I'd vote for the f000:fff0 > > vector, unless someone can hand me a paper that says it is wrong. > > I agree, for the simple reason that it is what the chip does on a > hardware reset signal. Hmzz... this seems indeed true for the 386, that's the only doc I got at hands here. Willing to believe that this is the hardware behaviour of all 386 and newer 32 bit procs. If this really fixes some issues, I'm eager to see that BIOS code.... Jos