On Wed, 30 Jul, at 12:29:32AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 01:09:21PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
The current debug print in EFI does
[0.00] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf,
range=[0x645b5000-0x645fb000) (0MB)
and rounds off the size to 0MB
On 07/30/14 12:58, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:21:26AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Arguably the exactness is available in the range...
... and the size too. FWIW, other region dumps don't even print size:
[0.00] e820: BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
[
The current debug print in EFI does
[0.00] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf,
range=[0x645b5000-0x645fb000) (0MB)
and rounds off the size to 0MB and isn't very useful. We should print this in
Kib. After applying this patch we get better info with
[0.00] efi: mem84:
On 07/29/2014 04:29 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
index 87fc96b..3875090 100644
--- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
@@ -384,10 +384,10 @@ static
On 07/29/2014 06:02 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2014-07-29 at 13:29 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
[]
@@ -384,10 +384,10 @@ static void __init print_efi_memmap(void)
On Tue, 2014-07-29 at 13:29 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
[]
@@ -384,10 +384,10 @@ static void __init print_efi_memmap(void)
p memmap.map_end;
p +=
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 01:09:21PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
The current debug print in EFI does
[0.00] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf,
range=[0x645b5000-0x645fb000) (0MB)
and rounds off the size to 0MB and isn't very useful. We should print this in
Kib. After
On 07/29/2014 06:29 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 01:09:21PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
The current debug print in EFI does
[0.00] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf,
range=[0x645b5000-0x645fb000) (0MB)
and rounds off the size to 0MB and isn't
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 06:32:56PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
and it was best to keep the code simple with a KiB.
You're missing the point - the output doesn't get simple with KiB. Read
the example I just gave you!
(13893632kiB) is actively
On 07/29/2014 06:36 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 06:32:56PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
and it was best to keep the code simple with a KiB.
You're missing the point - the output doesn't get simple with KiB. Read
the example I just gave you!
(13893632kiB) is
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 03:42:55PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
If Prarit is going to implement this suggested reverse memparse() ...
The only meaningful argument about the formatting here IMO is what
people staring at this output are going to understand from it.
And since those people most
On 07/29/2014 07:01 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 03:42:55PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
If Prarit is going to implement this suggested reverse memparse() ...
The only meaningful argument about the formatting here IMO is what
people staring at this output are going to
On Tue, 2014-07-29 at 15:42 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 06:32:56PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
and it was best to keep the code simple with a KiB.
You're missing the point - the output doesn't get simple with KiB.
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Joe Perches wrote:
Maybe yet another vsprintf extension?
Maybe %pHvartype where vartype is one of [hh, h, u, ul, ull]
with something like
u64 t1 = (u64)*(appropriate cast)vartype;
u64 t2 = t1;
int index = 0;
while ((t1 = 10)) {
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Prarit Bhargava pra...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/29/2014 06:36 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 06:32:56PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
and it was best to keep the code simple with a KiB.
You're missing the point - the output doesn't get
15 matches
Mail list logo
