On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 04:48:41PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> We should not set mapping for all under max_pfn. > > "We should not establish mappings for all memory under max_pfn."
that is not accurate. We should not set mapping for all range under max_pfn. or We should set mappings only for memory ranges under max_pfn. > >> That causes same problem that is fixed by > > "Otherwise, it causes the same ..." > >> >> x86, mm: Only direct map addresses that are marked as E820_RAM > > You could add this patch's commit id since it is in tip:x86/mm2 and it > shouldn't change: 66520ebc2df3. why ? they are not in linus tree yet, so it could change if that tip branch is rebased. > > Ditto for patch 09/31, "x86, 64bit: #PF handler set page to cover 2M only". > >> >> This patch expose pfn_mapped array, and only set ident mapping for ranges > > exposes the... sets > >> in that array. >> >> This patch rely on new ident_mapping_init that could handle existing > > relies on the new > >> pgd/pud between different calling. > > calls. > ok, fix those problems -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
