[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230605213742.chojqyrz5dtyo3mn@box.shutemov.name>
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2023 00:37:42 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@...e.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
marcelo.cerri@...onical.com, tim.gardner@...onical.com,
khalid.elmously@...onical.com, philip.cox@...onical.com,
aarcange@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv13 5/9] efi: Add unaccepted memory support
On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 09:12:25PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 08:33:03PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > There's nothing to warn about. The range (or part of it) is not
> > represented in the bitmap because it is not unaccepted.
>
> Sorry but how am I supposed to know that?!
>
> I've read the whole patchset up until now and all text talks like *all*
> *memory* needs to be accepted and before that has happeend, it is
> unaccepted.
>
> So how about you explain that explicitly somewhere, perhaps in a comment
> above accept_memory(), that the unaccepted range is not the whole memory
> but only, well, what is unaccepted and the rest is implicitly accepted?
Okay, will do.
> And I went and looked at the final result - we error() if we fail
> accepting.
>
> I guess that's the only action we can do anyway...
Right, there's no recovery from the error.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists