On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 06:32:01AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 26.09.16 at 13:34, wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 04:39:37AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 23.09.16 at 23:47, wrote:
> >> > It seems that from xen ELF image POV _end symbol properly determine
> >> > image end. Howev
>>> On 26.09.16 at 13:34, wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 04:39:37AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 23.09.16 at 23:47, wrote:
>> > It seems that from xen ELF image POV _end symbol properly determine
>> > image end. However, taking into account that initial Xen image mapping
>> > covers 16 M
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 04:39:37AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 23.09.16 at 23:47, wrote:
> > It seems that from xen ELF image POV _end symbol properly determine
> > image end. However, taking into account that initial Xen image mapping
> > covers 16 MiB it looks that it is not sufficient. C
>>> On 23.09.16 at 23:47, wrote:
> It seems that from xen ELF image POV _end symbol properly determine
> image end. However, taking into account that initial Xen image mapping
> covers 16 MiB it looks that it is not sufficient. Currently bootloader
> potentially may load xen ELF image at 1 MiB and
It seems that from xen ELF image POV _end symbol properly determine
image end. However, taking into account that initial Xen image mapping
covers 16 MiB it looks that it is not sufficient. Currently bootloader
potentially may load xen ELF image at 1 MiB and let's say put Linux
kernel or initrd at 8
