From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86, efi: Add an efi= kernel command line parameter Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 20:54:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20130606195450.GA3252@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1370177770-26661-1-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de> <1370177770-26661-4-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de> <20130606104224.GH30420@console-pimps.org> <20130606132603.GD20972@pd.tnic> <20130606175052.GA1285@srcf.ucam.org> <20130606185140.GK20972@pd.tnic> <20130606193548.GA2946@srcf.ucam.org> <20130606194134.GN20972@pd.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130606194134.GN20972-fF5Pk5pvG8Y@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Matt Fleming , Linux EFI , Jiri Kosina , X86-ML , LKML , Borislav Petkov List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:41:34PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:35:48PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > No, I think that's the wrong thing to do. We should set up the current > > mappings and the 1:1 mappings, and pass the current mappings through > > SetVirtualAddressMap(). That matches the behaviour of Windows. > > And when do we use the 1:1 mappings and when the current mappings when > doing runtime calls? We want both to be available when we're making the call, but I think we should probably enter via the high addresses. The only reason we're doing this at all is that some systems don't update all of their pointers from physical mode, and we'd prefer them to work rather than fault... -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org