linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20161209034608.GA30637@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Dec 2016 04:46:08 +0100
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc:     Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Russ Anderson <rja@....com>,
        David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX
 possible entries


* Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com> wrote:

> On 05/12/16 18:49, Alex Thorlton wrote:
> > This is the third pass at my patchset to fix up our problems with
> > XENMEM_machine_memory_map on large systems.  The only changes on this
> > pass were to flesh out the comment above the E820_X_MAX definition, and
> > to add Juergen's Reviewed-by to the second patch.
> > 
> > Let me know if anyone has any questions/comments!
> > 
> > Alex Thorlton (2):
> >   x86: Make E820_X_MAX unconditionally larger than E820MAX
> >   xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries
> > 
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/e820.h | 12 ++++++++----
> >  arch/x86/xen/setup.c        |  6 +++---
> >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> Ingo, do you have any preferences through which tree those patches
> should go? I'd like to have at least patch 2 in 4.10, so I could take
> it through the Xen tree.

Sure, both are fine to me:

  Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>

Thanks,

	Ingo