From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baoquan He Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/3] x86/boot/KASLR: Parse ACPI table and limit kaslr in immovable memory Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:30:57 +0800 Message-ID: <20181010093057.GA22088@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> References: <20181010084119.17539-1-fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20181010085920.GB5533@zn.tnic> <20181010090620.GF25297@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> <20181010091923.GC5533@zn.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181010091923.GC5533@zn.tnic> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Borislav Petkov , Thomas Gleixner Cc: Chao Fan , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, keescook@chromium.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, indou.takao@jp.fujitsu.com, caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, Masayoshi Mizuma List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 10/10/18 at 11:19am, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:14:26AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Yes, it's different, but if the SRAT information is available early, then > > the command line parameter can go away because then the required > > information for Masa's problem is available as well. > > Exactly. And I'd prefer we delayed the command line parameter until we > figure out we really need it and not expose it to upstream and then > remove it shortly after. > > So I'd suggest we move Masa's patches to a separate branch and not send > it up this round. Yes, sounds more reasonable if we can reuse functions in Chao's patch 1/3 to solve the padding issue. Thanks Baoquan