On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 03:12:40PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> Also the fw_vendor, runtime, tables elements will be fixed up to use
> virtual address after 1st kernel call SetVirtualAddress, so even with
> 1:1 mapping we still need save them and use in kexec kernel.
As I said a couple of times alre
On 09/12/13 at 02:53pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 03:34:15PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > I'm playing with skipping SetVirtualAddressMap in kexec kernel, for
> > same kernel the test result is ok for me both for kexec and kdump.
> > Takao Indoh sent a patch with this approatc
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 09:19:30AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> I did not understand this argument that we need to use high virtual
> addresses because windows is using it and now we end up creating
> fixed EFI addresses and that becomes an ABI. If EFI implementations
The only thing that becomes so
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 02:34:58PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> The second kernel still needs to be passed a pointer to the EFI tables
> and memory map.
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:53:50 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 03:34:15PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> Also kexec userspa
On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 14:53 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Why userspace part - I'm thinking the kexec'ed kernel would simply add
> the mappings made by SetVirtualAddressMap without calling it. And it
> will know which mappings go to which virtual addresses because we start
> at the -4G virtual a
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 03:34:15PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> I'm playing with skipping SetVirtualAddressMap in kexec kernel, for
> same kernel the test result is ok for me both for kexec and kdump.
> Takao Indoh sent a patch with this approatch, but his V2 switched to
> use physical mapping. Durin
On 09/11/13 at 04:32pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:45:34AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > I am looking forward to that new version. CCing Dave Young. He is also
> > looking into it and going through history of patches.
>
> Ok, I'll CC you guys on the submission - I'd need a
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:45:34AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> I am looking forward to that new version. CCing Dave Young. He is also
> looking into it and going through history of patches.
Ok, I'll CC you guys on the submission - I'd need any and all feedback I
can get on that topic.
Thanks.
--
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 01:44:19PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 03:52:24PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Borislav Petkov has been working on a fixed mapping of UEFI memory,...
>
> ... who will back from vacation on Monday and will be sending out a new
> RFC version.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 03:52:24PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Borislav Petkov has been working on a fixed mapping of UEFI memory,...
... who will back from vacation on Monday and will be sending out a new
RFC version.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "
On 09/10/2013 02:44 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> Currently kexec does not enables EFI and its tables in second kernel. Hence
> acpi rsdp root pointer is passed on command line. But secureboot does not
> trust
> acpi_rsdp on command line as kernel can execute some of the code as retrieved
> by followin
Currently kexec does not enables EFI and its tables in second kernel. Hence
acpi rsdp root pointer is passed on command line. But secureboot does not trust
acpi_rsdp on command line as kernel can execute some of the code as retrieved
by following acpi_rsdp and root can modify command line. So in se
12 matches
Mail list logo
