On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:43 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/19/2012 03:40 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:22 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> The other bit is that building the real kernel page tables iteratively >>> (ignoring the early page tables here) is safer, since the real page >>> table builder is fully aware of the memory map. This means any >>> "spillover" from the early page tables gets minimized to regions where >>> there are data objects that have to be accessed early. Since Yinghai >>> already had iterative page table building working, I don't see any >>> reason to not use that capability. >> >> >> that is v6, right? >> >> including that patch >> > > No, that's just a different way to create the early page tables (and it > doesn't solve anything, quite on the contrary.) I'm talking about the > strategy for creating the *permanent* page tables > i'm confused. permanent one is in tip/x86/mm2 right? for for-x86-boot: so you want v7 plus attached patch ? that change to 2M per PF. Yinghai
Attachment:
fix_hpa_pe_pgt.patch
Description: Binary data
|