linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 7 of 7] x86: always explicitly map acpi memory

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <86802c440809071714g63fb18c8xd78d8d555f456176@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:14:51 -0700
From:	"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	"Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Xen Devel" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 7 of 7] x86: always explicitly map acpi memory

On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> actually,
>> case 1: acpi tables near mmio, range, we don't map them from
>> 2.6.27-rc1, and it is bigger than max_low_mapped...
>> case 2: some strange system put acpi in the middle of RAM... like when
>> 8G ram installed, but MMIO is 3.5G, BIOS put acpi tables around 2G..
>>
>
> OK, so what's your conclusion?  Is this change OK or not?
>

Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
--
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/