linux-kernel - MPS table vs ACPI

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

Message-ID: <4E0BA7FE.9050607@hp.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:32:30 -0600
From:	sreenivasa reddy berahalli <sreenivasa-reddy-berahalli@...com>
To:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	x86@...nel.org, yinghai@...nel.org,
	Feng Tang <feng.tang@...ux.intel.com>, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: MPS table vs ACPI

Hello All,

Recent interaction with BIOS teams within in my Organization left me
wondering if MP table spec from Intel is no more a mandatory one
http://www.intel.com/design/pentium/datashts/24201606.pdf

Section #8.4.5 http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/manual/253668.pdf
Talks as ACPI or MPS table.
That means BIOS can report through ACPI tables only.

I looked through x86 boot sequence and notice Linux scanning for MPS
table in below locations and Linux doesn't seem to go further without
MPS table or doesn't know how to live with ACPI only.
 1) Scan the bottom 1K for a signature
 2) Scan the top 1K of base RAM
 3) Scan the 64K of bios

Your insights into this topic are appreciated.

Thanks,
Sreenivas
--
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/