From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:54:26 +0100 Message-ID: <20130620165426.GB26214@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20130619130434.GB24957@gmail.com> <20130619160804.GB27832@srcf.ucam.org> <20130620091321.GB6811@gmail.com> <20130620091537.GA17159@srcf.ucam.org> <20130620092237.GA6943@gmail.com> <20130620093337.GI32694@pd.tnic> <20130620094446.GA17882@srcf.ucam.org> <1371740019.2372.3.camel@dabdike> <20130620162916.GA25727@srcf.ucam.org> <1371746775.2372.11.camel@dabdike> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1371746775.2372.11.camel@dabdike> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar , Linux EFI , Matt Fleming , X86 ML , LKML , Borislav Petkov List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 09:46:15AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > Unless you can think of the way out of this, we seem to have the stark > choice of behave like windows or allow kexec. For the server market, > kexec wins, so either we find a way not to have to make the choice or we > do something automatic to make it fairly painless. hpa suggested ensuring that UEFI regions are mapped at fixed high offsets. Someone who cares about kexec should probably make that happen. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org