From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Revert "x86/kexec/64: Prevent kexec from 5-level paging to a 4-level only kernel"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 12:02:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZefquYIOFlCULYI/@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240305115533.GBZecINWGlb73W0nQS@fat_crate.local>
On 03/05/24 at 12:55pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 11:43:01AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
......
>
> > If we take off the checking, and people want to jump from the new kernel
> > to an old kernel where 5-level kernel code haven't been added or
> > CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL is unset on purpose, it won't fail and prompt message at
> > all until 2nd kernel booting silently failed. E.g, the coming RHEL10 anchor
> > a upstream kernel w/o the flag checking, people want to kexec/kdump jump
> > from rhel10 to an old rhel7 kernel. It could be an extreme case, while
> > revealing the scenario.
>
> That is the only valid reason you've given until now. Yes, that makes
> sense - the removal of those flags should go together with the removal
> of CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL and making this feature unconditional.
Please forgive my awful expression.
>
> Because, practically, that config item is enabled on every relevant
> x86 kernel config out there. It would be silly if not.
I agree. Thanks for looking into this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-06 4:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-01 18:56 [RFC PATCH 0/2] x86/kexec: Revert 5level dynamic switching Borislav Petkov
2024-03-01 18:56 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] Revert "x86/kexec/64: Prevent kexec from 5-level paging to a 4-level only kernel" Borislav Petkov
2024-03-04 10:51 ` Baoquan He
2024-03-04 11:11 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-03-05 3:43 ` Baoquan He
2024-03-05 11:55 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-03-06 4:02 ` Baoquan He [this message]
2024-03-01 18:56 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] Revert "x86/boot: Add xloadflags bits to check for 5-level paging support" Borislav Petkov
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=ZefquYIOFlCULYI/@MiWiFi-R3L-srv \
--to=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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