linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/boot: add acpi rsdp address to setup

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: <20171208083516.gc7buju6zucxnlnf@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Dec 2017 09:35:16 +0100
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:     lenb@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, corbet@....net,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, mingo@...hat.com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/boot: add acpi rsdp address to
 setup_header


* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com> wrote:

> >>> On 08.12.17 at 08:16, <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Also, a more fundamental question: why doesn't Xen use EFI to hand over 
> > hardware configuration details?
> 
> Iirc the main purpose of the change here is to allow booting PVH
> (guest or Dom0) with Grub2 in the middle. PVH, at least for the
> time being, is something that gets away without any firmware
> (and I'm pretty certain this is going to remain that way for Dom0).
> ACPI tables are being built by the tool stack (guest) or hypervisor
> (Dom0). Hence there simply isn't any EFI which could be used to
> propagate such information.

Ok, that's fair enough. If hpa (or someone else) doesn't object to the boot 
protocol extension this approach looks good to me in principle.

Thanks,

	Ingo