On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 06:18:27PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 05:08:04PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > But, as always, the only reliable thing to do here is to behave as > > much like Windows as possible. Which means performing the 1:1 mapping > > but maintaining the high mapping, and passing the high values via > > SetVirtualAddressMap. > > We can't pass the high values via SetVirtualAddressMap and have EFI > runtime in the kexec-ed kernel, as you and I established last week. And > since not all would want EFI runtime in the kexec-ed kernel, I'm leaning > more towards a boot-time option which enables the 1:1 mapping. Yes, kexec needs a different solution. > Btw, why would you even want the 1:1 mappings if we pass the high values > via SetVirtualAddressMap? Because firmware images don't always update all of the pointers, and so will crash if the 1:1 mappings aren't present. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
