init32.S: Seemingly no-op start function

init32.S: Seemingly no-op start function

[Vild]

I want the entry function to be called start, because almost all programs/kernels (at least those I've looked at) call their entry function start, so if anyone would objdump/nm/whatever on the loader executable they would easily find the entrypoint from the symbol list.
and for some reason I chose to jump to boot32BSP instead of just having start be called both start and boot32BSP.

and lastly the no-op is just a breakpoint for bochs, so it always pauses as soon as the loading gains control from grub.

Any chance we could get a reason for why `start` can't have the contents of `boot32BSP`?

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017, 8:50 PM Dan Printzell ***@***.***> wrote: I want the entry function to be called start, because almost all programs/kernels (at least those I've looked at) call their entry function start, so if anyone would objdump/nm/whatever on the loader executable they would easily find the entrypoint from the symbol list. and for some reason I chose to jump to boot32BSP instead of just having start be called both start and boot32BSP. and lastly the no-op is just a breakpoint for bochs, so it always pauses as soon as the loading gains control from grub. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#77 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARILTnbwhCYA3VvINgWp2KQcZM7U7ymlks5slrKigaJpZM4Ph-pl> .

-- AK

[Vild]

It can contain the same code, but I like the symmetry of boot32BSP and boot32AP

I forget to ask: Why do we have a `BSP` set and an `AP` set? Why do we need `init16.S`? It looks like we still boot to 64bit, but starting from 16bit.

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017, 9:19 PM Dan Printzell ***@***.***> wrote: It can contain the same code, but I like the symmetry of boot32BSP and boot32AP — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#77 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARILTuPyBRl4kxeI7v8JpzVP0FUmAduuks5slrlogaJpZM4Ph-pl> .

-- AK

[Vild]

BSP = BootStrap Processor, the processor that your code runs on by default, the one that grub gives you.
AP = Additional Processor, the processors that I boot in the smp.d file.

The BSP will be in protected mode when I get it from grub, but the APs will be in 16bit.
So init16.S is only used by the APs.

OK. Cool. So APs are extra processors? Could you give an example situation where this applies?

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017, 9:33 PM Dan Printzell ***@***.***> wrote: BSP = BootStrap Processor, the processor that your code runs on by default, the one that grub gives you. AP = Additional Processor, the processors that I boot in the smp.d file. The BSP will be in protected mode when I get it from grub, but the APs will be in 16bit. So init16.S is only used by the APs. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#77 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARILTsFj4rHSfek7e1cF72MPNl7CNOHjks5slrypgaJpZM4Ph-pl> .

-- AK

[Vild]

extra process / extra cores, it is all the same (ish).
http://wiki.osdev.org/Multiprocessing