[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110716162805.GA13127@srcf.ucam.org>
Date:	Sat, 16 Jul 2011 17:28:06 +0100
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
	"kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jarod Wilson <jwilson@...hat.com>,
	"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Replace a function call chain of
 kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_KEXEC) with static function calls
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 09:16:06AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> What is going on with EFI support?  We are still making efi calls in
> virtual mode, and we don't have the one unified identity mapped physical
> page table that hpa and I think others were working a while back.  Even
> if because of bugs we need to transition EFI to virtual mode we can
> still set physical to virtual so we don't have to deal with the nonsense.
No, we can't. It doesn't work.
> Can we please make our EFI support ask the minimal from EFI before
> adding lots more to it?
No.
> Am I wrong in thinking that the core motivation behind this patch is
> that our EFI support sucks and thus kdump on EFI does not work on some
> platforms?
Yes, you are.
-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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
 
