Re: [PATCH 08/15] kexec: New syscall kexec_file_load() declaration

2014-06-26 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Vivek Goyal vgo...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 04:33:37PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: This is the new syscall kexec_file_load() declaration/interface. I have reserved the syscall number only for x86_64 so far. Other architectures (including i386)

Re: [PATCH v6 10/34] x86, x86/mm, x86/xen, olpc: Use __va() against just the physical address in cr3

2017-06-08 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: > The cr3 register entry can contain the SME encryption bit that indicates > the PGD is encrypted. The encryption bit should not be used when creating > a virtual address for the PGD table. > > Create a new function,

Re: [PATCH v7 11/36] x86/mm: Add SME support for read_cr3_pa()

2017-06-20 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Tom Lendacky wrote: > The cr3 register entry can contain the SME encryption mask that indicates > the PGD is encrypted. The encryption mask should not be used when > creating a virtual address from the cr3 register, so remove the SME >

Re: [PATCH v6 10/34] x86, x86/mm, x86/xen, olpc: Use __va() against just the physical address in cr3

2017-06-09 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com> wrote: > On 6/8/2017 1:05 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> The cr3 register entr

Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: add __X32_COND_SYSCALL() macro

2020-09-19 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:35 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:24:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > sys_move_pages() is an optional syscall, and once we remove > > the compat version of it in favor of the native one with an > > in_compat_syscall() check, the x32

Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: add __X32_COND_SYSCALL() macro

2020-09-19 Thread Andy Lutomirski
> On Sep 19, 2020, at 10:14 AM, h...@zytor.com wrote: > > On September 19, 2020 9:23:22 AM PDT, Andy Lutomirski > wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:35 PM Christoph Hellwig >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:24:36PM

Re: [PATCH] x86/efi: Do not release sub-1MB memory regions when the crashkernel option is specified

2021-04-11 Thread Andy Lutomirski
> On Apr 11, 2021, at 6:14 PM, Baoquan He wrote: > > On 04/09/21 at 07:59pm, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Why don't we do this unconditionally? At the very best we gain half a >> megabyte of memory (except the trampoline, which has to live there, but it >> is only a few kilobytes.) > > This is

Re: [PATCH] x86/efi: Do not release sub-1MB memory regions when the crashkernel option is specified

2021-04-12 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 2:52 AM Baoquan He wrote: > > On 04/11/21 at 06:49pm, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 11, 2021, at 6:14 PM, Baoquan He wrote: > > > > > > On 04/09/21 at 07:59pm, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > >> Why don't

Re: [PATCH v8 06/15] x86: Add early SHA support for Secure Launch early measurements

2024-04-03 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024, at 10:30 AM, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 06:20:27PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 23/02/2024 5:54 pm, Eric Biggers wrote: >> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 04:42:11PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> >> Yes, and I agree.  We're not looking to try and force this