So the bootloader is just as likely to step on things... what happens when/if
it does?
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>* Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
>> Patch 2/2 has the description, but suffice it to say I'm
>> not really pleased with this, though it does solve a
>> problem we have. On some machines, we ge
On 07/25/2013 05:31 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:42 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> So the bootloader is just as likely to step on things... what happens
>> when/if it does?
>
> This isn't a new problem. We've had this "firmware ta
On 07/25/2013 04:17 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Well, it's ok if the boot loader writes to this memory, the worst
> that'll happen is you'll see garbage on the screen. If the boot loader
> tries to do MMIO mapping on top it'll get into trouble... but why would
> it do that?
>
> Jesse
Much worse: i
On 07/25/2013 07:14 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> To clarify: it'll either be marked reserved or not listed at all in e820,
> which is why I did this early, before any other e820 stuff like the "RAM
> buffer" are allocated, and before we could use the iomem resource (or maybe
> we could even early p
On 07/25/2013 09:37 AM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Systems with Intel graphics controllers set aside memory exclusively for
> + /*
> + * Almost universally we can find the Graphics Base of Stolen Memory
> + * at offset 0x5c in the igfx configuration space. On a few (desktop)
> + * mac
On 07/26/2013 01:24 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Am I being too pedantic in expecting that we still mark it
> e820-reserved?
>
> This area really isnt an ordinary PCI resource such as a
> BAR or an MMIO region. It's truly system RAM (which cannot
> be moved/reallocated), used by graphics hardwar
On 02/24/2014 12:19 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Btw,
>
> I don't know whether the following observation is related or not, but it
> so happens that after resume from suspend-to-disk, I see the booting up
> of the resume kernel on the console but when it is time for the original
> kernel to take o
If noone hers to them first poke me tomorrow. On an aircraft right now.
Daniel Vetter wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 01:32:50PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> These address the comments I've received so far, but omit the new
>E820
>> type for this mem.
>>
>> Chris's patches could go on top if de
On 10/22/2014 02:38 PM, Eric Paris wrote:
>
> It was sent, numerous times, to the x86 list for reviews, and lived in
> -next for 2 complete devel cycles without a complaint. I'm trying to
> get an i386 system to test a fix. But yes, it's total crap.
>
You don't need an i386 system -- you can i
