Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1592084 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86: Introduce a new constant KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE

Started byBorislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
First post2017-03-03 17:00 +0100
Last post2017-03-03 17:00 +0100
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86: Introduce a new constant KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-03 17:00 +0100

#1592084 — Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86: Introduce a new constant KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE

FromBorislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Date2017-03-03 17:00 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86: Introduce a new constant KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE
Message-ID<tgUc1-102-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:09:08PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> Am I right on understanding it?

That's exactly what I mean: KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE is 512M by default but
we're not hard-constrained to it - we're hard-constrained to a 1G limit
as this is the 1G which is covered by level2_kernel_pgt.

And in thinking about this more, I know I suggested making the
KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE by default 1G in order to simplify things.

But you're adding another KERNEL_MAPPING_SIZE which confuses things
more. And I fail to see why we absolutely need it.

So we suggest kernel image size should be 512M but then we still will
be using a whole 1G mapping for it anyway and a whole page of PMDs at
level2_kernel_pgt.

So why even bother?

Just make it 1G and don't introduce anything new.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
-- 

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web