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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:16:31 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Jesse Barnes" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: split e820 reserved entries record to late v4 On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 11:58 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote: > > * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> wrote: > >> > BIOS-e820: 0000000077ff0000 - 0000000078000000 (reserved) >> > BIOS-e820: 00000000e0000000 - 00000000f0000000 (reserved) >> > BIOS-e820: 00000000fec00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved) >> > >> > which overlaps with the chipset PCI BAR (hpet) resource: >> > >> > pci 0000:00:14.0: BAR has HPET at fed00000-fed003ff >> > >> > so due to this 1K conflict we take the full e820-reserved entry out and >> > give the range 0xfec00000-0x100000000 as 'free'. >> >> you will get >> fec00000 - ffffffff reserved >> fed0000 - fed003ff hpet >> fed0000 - fed003ff 0000:00:14.0 > > ok - because it's fully contained insert_resource() will succeed? I > thought it would only succeed if the new resource was smaller than (a > subset of) the existing resource. In the other direction, when a newly > inserted resource is a superset of the existing resource, i thought we'd > fail. > > hypothetical scenario, what if we had neither a superset nor a subset > scenario, but a partial overlap, between: > >> > BIOS-e820: 00000000fec00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved) > > and: > >> > pci 0000:00:14.0: BAR has HPET at feb0f000-fec01000 > > i.e. we have: > > [... PCI BAR ...] > [... e820 reservation ...] > > in that case the insert_resource() will fail due to the conflict. Can we > declare it in that case that the e820 reserved entry is mortally broken > and we just ignore it? yes, that will fail to insert ... expand to 0xfeb0f000 - 0xfffffff and try again.? may need to update insert_resource to return conflict resource ... > > At least we should emit a prominent warning if insert_resource() fails, > and add in an mdelay(2000) so that the user sees it. right YH -- 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