[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 21:41:34 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86, efi: Add an efi= kernel command line parameter
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 mappings and when the current mappings when
doing runtime calls?
Also, would the 1:1 mappings even work if not passed through
SetVirtualAddressMap? I'm sensing a "yes" but I don't know...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists