[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50CA7515.9080701@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:38:45 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 19/27] x86, boot: update comments about entries for
64bit image
On 12/13/2012 04:13 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 3:27 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>> On 12/13/2012 02:02 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>> + * If we come here from a bootloader, kernel(text+data+bss+brk),
>>> + * ramdisk, zero_page, command line could be above 4G.
>>> + * We depend on an identity mapped page table being provided
>>> + * that maps our entire kernel(text+data+bss+brk), and hopefully
>>> + * all of memory.
>>
>> We should make it explicit what we depend on. We certainly *can* depend
>> only on text+data+bss+brk ... with the dynamic page table approach we
>> can do that, and that would be most conservative; if we depend on other
>> things we should make that explicit, not just here but in boot.txt.
>
> yes, in my version, only need kernel(text+data+bss+brk) get mapped.
> aka the INIT_SIZE for decompressing.
>
It is definitely the minmum we can rely on, and so is the minimum we
should rely on. In fact, we don't even need .bss/.brk to be mapped, but
we probably should require that as a matter of protocol.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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