[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51C383AC.4060706@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 15:35:24 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
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
On 06/20/2013 11:47 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> I guess we can do a top-down allocation, starting from the highest
> virtual addresses:
>
> EFI_HIGHEST_ADDRESS
> |
> | size1
> |
> --> region1
> |
> | size2
> |
> --> region2
>
> ...
>
> and we make EFI_HIGHEST_ADDRESS be the same absolute number on every
> system.
>
> hpa, is this close to what you had in mind? It would be prudent to
> verify whether this will suit well with the kexec virtual space layout
> though...
>
This would work really well, I think. The tricky part here is to pick a
safe EFI_HIGHEST_ADDRESS as it is an ABI.
My preference would be to make EFI_HIGHEST_ADDRESS = -4 GB, which is
*not* what Windows uses, but will leave the high negative range clear,
and allows a range where we can grow down without much risk of
interfering with anything else.
-hpa
--
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