On Thu, 06 Jun, at 03:26:03PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:42:24AM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Sun, 02 Jun, at 02:56:09PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
+
+static int __init parse_efi_cmdline(char *str)
+{
+ if (*str == '=')
+ str++;
+ if
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 06:50:52PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 03:26:03PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
This would break the Macs, remember?
I think the Macs will be fine as long as we're passing the high mappings
into SetVirtualAddressMap().
Right, on those
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:51:40PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 06:50:52PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 03:26:03PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
This would break the Macs, remember?
I think the Macs will be fine as long as we're
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:35:48PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
No, I think that's the wrong thing to do. We should set up the current
mappings and the 1:1 mappings, and pass the current mappings through
SetVirtualAddressMap(). That matches the behaviour of Windows.
And when do we use the 1:1
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
We want both to be available when we're making the call, but I think
we should probably enter via the high addresses. The only reason we're
doing this at all is that some systems don't update all of their
pointers from physical
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 10:07:05PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
We want both to be available when we're making the call, but I think
we should probably enter via the high addresses. The only reason we're
doing this at all is
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:18:28PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
kexec seems like a lower priority than compatibility. Perhaps keep the
efi argument for people who want to use kexec?
This is what I currently have in the code: if you boot with efi=1:1_map,
you get them.
hpa suggested
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 10:27:17PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:18:28PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
kexec seems like a lower priority than compatibility. Perhaps keep the
efi argument for people who want to use kexec?
This is what I currently have in the code:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:30:57PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Well, we want the 1:1 mappings to exist all the time. The only
thing the option should change is whether they're passed to
SetVirtualAddressMap() or not.
But can you call them even if they haven't been passed through
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:50:57PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
What do you mean by call them? I don't think we ever want to call by
physical address, other than maybe in the kexec case. The only reason
we really care about the physical addresses being mapped 1:1 is that
some pointers may not
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:02:18PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:50:57PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
What do you mean by call them? I don't think we ever want to call by
physical address, other than maybe in the kexec case. The only reason
we really care about
11 matches
Mail list logo
