On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Aug, at 12:03:22PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>
>> I'd expect we'd abort at a higher level, not taking any sample. i.e.
>> we'd have the core overflow handler check in_funny_mm(), and if so, skip
>> the sample,
The existing map iteration helper for_each_efi_memory_desc_in_map can
only be used after OS initializes EFI subsystem to fill data of struct
efi_memory_map. Before that we also need iterate map descriptors which
are stored in several intermediate structures, like struct efi_boot_memmap
for arch
On 08/16/17 at 12:37pm, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug, at 10:54:23PM, Baoquan He wrote:
> > The existing map iteration helper for_each_efi_memory_desc_in_map can
> > only be used after OS initializes EFI to fill data of struct efi_memory_map.
>
> Should this say "EFI subsystem"? The
On Wed, 16 Aug, at 12:03:22PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> I'd expect we'd abort at a higher level, not taking any sample. i.e.
> we'd have the core overflow handler check in_funny_mm(), and if so, skip
> the sample, as with the skid case.
FYI, this is my preferred solution for x86 too.
--
To
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:07:10AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:53:38AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:31:12AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > (+ Mark, Will)
> > >
> > > On 15 August 2017 at 22:46, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:53:38AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:31:12AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > (+ Mark, Will)
> >
> > On 15 August 2017 at 22:46, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Sai Praneeth Prakhya
> > >
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:31:12AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> (+ Mark, Will)
>
> On 15 August 2017 at 22:46, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Sai Praneeth Prakhya
> > wrote:
> >> +/*
> >> + * Makes the calling