linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86 boot: Pass E820 memory map entries more than 128 via linked list of setup data

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

Message-Id: <1214212441.27182.4.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:14:01 +0800
From:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	yhlu.kernel@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 boot: Pass E820 memory map entries more than 128
	via linked list of setup data

On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 03:47 -0500, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Huang Ying wrote:
> > So, I think it is better to remove "EFI memmap based code".
> 
> You give good reasons for -adding- E820 EXT code.  Fine.
> 
> You give no reason for -removing- the EFI memmap based code,
> except the implicit (unstated) reason that we should only
> support a single mechanism.
> 
> However the kernel routinely supports a variety of mechanisms
> for various BIOS firmware, as it should.
> 
> Internally, within the kernel, when it is entirely within the
> kernels control and when there is no externally visible kernel
> interface affected, we routinely strive to minimize redundant
> mechanisms, as we should.
> 
> But externally, such as in supporting various boot firmware
> protocols, we routinely support multiple useful interfaces.
> 
> If that EFI memmap based code for > 128 nodes is causing you
> no problem, then please leave it be.  It is providing us good
> benefit.

Please fix the following issue, if it is agreed to keep this redundant
code in kernel:

4. Current EFI memmap based code does not work properly in all
situation, for example it can not works with kernel parameter:
"memmap=exactmap, memmap=<xxx>, ...", "mem=<xxx>" or "noefi".

Best Regards,
Huang Ying

--
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/