From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: KEXEC: fix kexec_get_range_compat to fail vocally Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 13:01:34 +0000 Message-ID: <4EDCC0AE.1030100@citrix.com> References: <4EDCAC68.8060303@citrix.com> <4EDCCDE802000078000656A1@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4EDCCDE802000078000656A1@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jan Beulich Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 05/12/11 12:58, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 05.12.11 at 12:35, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> I am not sure that this is the only instance, but it is really not >> acceptable to hand truncated pointers or sizes for physical memory to dom0. > While I agree to the change, I think we also ought to add a new flavor > of KEXEC_CMD_kexec_get_range that is 64-bit capable even for a > 32-bit Dom0. Agreed - I am working on introducing a new hypercall right now. > Both under the assumption that apart from the truncation nothing > prevents addresses above the 4G boundary from being usable with > a 32-bit kernel for at least one of the ranges (probably only > KEXEC_RANGE_MA_CPU and KEXEC_RANGE_MA_VMCOREINFO are > candidates for this on x86). Will those ranges not be covered by my patch? > Jan > -- Andrew Cooper - Dom0 Kernel Engineer, Citrix XenServer T: +44 (0)1223 225 900, http://www.citrix.com