Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping

Matthew Garrett
2013-06-19T16:48:28Z

On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 06:38:04PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 05:21:15PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Yes, kexec needs a different solution.
>
> No need. If we say, "efi=use_11_map", the 1:1 map will be shoved down
> SetVirtualAddressMap. Otherwise the high mappings.

Ah, sure - if we're willing to take an argument then we can leave it at
that. But having a stable set of high addresses for UEFI is also an
option.

> > Because firmware images don't always update all of the pointers, and
> > so will crash if the 1:1 mappings aren't present.
>
> Ok, so it sounds like we want to *always* create both mappings but,
> depending on what we want, to shove down SetVirtualAddressMap a
> different set. And the 1:1 map will be the optional one which we give
> SetVirtualAddressMap only when user wants it, i.e. when booting with
> "efi=1:1_map".

Yup, I think that sounds ideal.

--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org