linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] x86, acpi: Move acpi_initrd

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:29:03 -0600
From:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
To:	Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@...il.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	konrad.wilk@...cle.com, robert.moore@...el.com, lv.zheng@...el.com,
	rjw@...k.pl, lenb@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
	hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, trenn@...e.de,
	yinghai@...nel.org, jiang.liu@...wei.com, wency@...fujitsu.com,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com,
	izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com, mgorman@...e.de, minchan@...nel.org,
	mina86@...a86.com, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com, lwoodman@...hat.com,
	riel@...hat.com, jweiner@...hat.com, prarit@...hat.com,
	zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com, yanghy@...fujitsu.com, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] x86, acpi: Move acpi_initrd_override() earlier.

Hello Zhang,

On Sat, 2013-08-24 at 00:54 +0800, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
> > Tang, what do you think?  Are you OK to try Tejun's suggestion as well? 
> > 
> 
> By saying TJ's suggestion, you mean, we will let memblock to control the
> behaviour, that said, we will do early allocations near the kernel image
> range before we get the SRAT info?

Right.

> If so, yeah, we have been working on this direction. 

Great!

> By doing this, we may
> have two main changes:
> 
> 1. change some of memblock's APIs to make it have the ability to allocate
>    memory from low address.
> 2. setup kernel page table down-top. Concretely, we first map the memory
>    just after the kernel image to the top, then, we map 0 - kernel image end.
> 
> Do you guys think this is reasonable and acceptable?

Have you also looked at Yinghai's comments below?

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg61362.html

Thanks,
-Toshi

--
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/