[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 12:43:49 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
keescook@...omium.org, yinghai@...nel.org, anderson@...hat.com,
luto@...nel.org, thgarnie@...gle.com, kuleshovmail@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86: Introduce a new constant KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:09:08PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> Am I right on understanding it?
That's exactly what I mean: KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE is 512M by default but
we're not hard-constrained to it - we're hard-constrained to a 1G limit
as this is the 1G which is covered by level2_kernel_pgt.
And in thinking about this more, I know I suggested making the
KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE by default 1G in order to simplify things.
But you're adding another KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE which confuses things
more. And I fail to see why we absolutely need it.
So we suggest kernel image size should be 512M but then we still will
be using a whole 1G mapping for it anyway and a whole page of PMDs at
level2_kernel_pgt.
So why even bother?
Just make it 1G and don't introduce anything new.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists