[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130603143010.GA20252@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 15:30:10 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 07:27:22AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> That's correct. I think not calling SetVirtualAddressMap() and just
> using a 1:1 mapping is far safer (having looked at what tianocore does
> for SetVirtualAddressMap()). The chances are that all the UEFI bioses
> are only tested with windows, so the pointer chases it has to do to
> switch address maps only work with the operations windows does.
Windows calls SetVirtualAddressMap(), so the only way these systems have
been tested is with SetVirtualAddressMap().
--
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