Re: [RFC PATCH v4 11/28] x86: Add support to determine the E820 type of an address

2017-03-03 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 04:34:39PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Or if we want to guard against ACPI adding a type 0 in the future, I > could make the function return an int and then return -EINVAL if an e820 > entry isn't found. This might be the better option. Yap, think so too. I don't trust

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 11/28] x86: Add support to determine the E820 type of an address

2017-02-28 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 2/20/2017 2:09 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 09:44:30AM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: This patch adds support to return the E820 type associated with an address s/This patch adds/Add/ range. Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky ---

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 11/28] x86: Add support to determine the E820 type of an address

2017-02-20 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 09:44:30AM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > This patch adds support to return the E820 type associated with an address s/This patch adds/Add/ > range. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/e820/api.h |2 ++ >

[RFC PATCH v4 11/28] x86: Add support to determine the E820 type of an address

2017-02-16 Thread Tom Lendacky
This patch adds support to return the E820 type associated with an address range. Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky --- arch/x86/include/asm/e820/api.h |2 ++ arch/x86/include/asm/e820/types.h |2 ++ arch/x86/kernel/e820.c| 26