,"Paul E . McKenney" ,Andrew
Morton ,Christopher Li ,Dou
Liyang ,Masahiro Yamada
,Daniel Borkmann ,Markus
On 07/19/17 15:47, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 07/18/17 15:33, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>>> The x86 relocation tool generates a list of 32-bit signed integers. There
>>> was no need to use 64-bit integers because all addresses
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 4:08 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 07/19/17 15:47, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> On 07/18/17 15:33, Thomas Garnier wrote:
The x86 relocation tool generates a list of 32-bit signed
On 07/18/17 15:33, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> The x86 relocation tool generates a list of 32-bit signed integers. There
> was no need to use 64-bit integers because all addresses where above the 2G
> top of the memory.
>
> This change add a large-reloc option to generate 64-bit unsigned integers.
>
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 07/18/17 15:33, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>> The x86 relocation tool generates a list of 32-bit signed integers. There
>> was no need to use 64-bit integers because all addresses where above the 2G
>> top of the memory.
>>
>>
The x86 relocation tool generates a list of 32-bit signed integers. There
was no need to use 64-bit integers because all addresses where above the 2G
top of the memory.
This change add a large-reloc option to generate 64-bit unsigned integers.
It can be used when the kernel plan to go below the