From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
untaintableangel@hotmail.co.uk, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: decrease maximum of X86_RESERVE_LOW to 512K
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 10:47:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YK4LGUDWXJWOp7IR@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210526081100.12239-1-rppt@kernel.org>
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:11:00AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
>
> After the consolidation of early memory reservations introduced by the
> commit a799c2bd29d1 ("x86/setup: Consolidate early memory reservations")
> the kernel fails to boot if X86_RESERVE_LOW is set to 640K.
>
> The boot fails because real-time trampoline must be allocated under 1M (or
> essentially under 640K) but with X86_RESERVE_LOW set to 640K the memory is
> already reserved by the time reserve_real_mode() is called.
>
> Before the reordering of the early memory reservations it was possible to
> allocate from low memory even despite user's request to avoid using that
> memory. This lack of consistency could potentially lead to memory
> corruptions by BIOS in the areas allocated by kernel.
Hmm, so this sounds weird to me: real-time trampoline clearly has
precedence over X86_RESERVE_LOW because you need former to boot the
machine, right?
In that case, real-time trampoline should allocate first and *then* the
rest of low range requested to be reserved should be reserved, no?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-26 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-26 8:11 [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: decrease maximum of X86_RESERVE_LOW to 512K Mike Rapoport
2021-05-26 8:47 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2021-05-26 16:30 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-26 18:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-05-27 13:38 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-28 14:41 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-05-28 2:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2021-05-28 14:43 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-05-28 20:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2021-05-31 9:32 ` David Laight
2021-05-31 12:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YK4LGUDWXJWOp7IR@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=untaintableangel@hotmail.co.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox