[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130620091321.GB6811@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:13:21 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping
* Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 03:04:34PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> > > And yet there are the Macs which reportedly cannot stomach this.
> >
> > Do we know why?
>
> I got lost in a maze of pointer arithmetic. There seems to be an
> assumption that nvram writes should be forbidden if in runtime mode but
> with pointers still below the phys/virt split, which obviously makes no
> sense but hey.
>
> But, as always, the only reliable thing to do here is to behave as much
> like Windows as possible. [...]
Amen ...
> [...] Which means performing the 1:1 mapping but maintaining the high
> mapping, and passing the high values via SetVirtualAddressMap.
Cool - and supposedly this will work in a Mac environment as well? Would
be very nice to avoid fundamentally fragile system specific quirks for
something as fundamental as the EFI runtime memory mapping model ...
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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