[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE9FiQXeODfyPJmrL7reW+nHe1RXEbTKnC=DqMfpkNKYywPWSw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 12:55:40 -0800
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/microcode] x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update
ucode on Intel's CPU
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:30 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> What is the point of only managing 2M at a time? Now you have to have
> more conditionals and you don't get any more memory efficiency.
We don't need to, because real_data is less than 2M, and ramdisk is about 16M.
Also if we set map too large, could have chance to cover mem hole near
1T for AMD HT system.
>
> Filling arbitrarily into the brk is not acceptable... the brk is an O(1)
> area and all brk allocations need to be reserved at compile time, so the
> overflow handling is still necessary.
if run out of BRK, we will get panic, because early_make_pgtable will return -1.
and current BRK already have 64 slop space.
BTW, did you look at smp boot problem with early_level4_pgt version?
Yinghai
--
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