lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Feb]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86/intel/quark: Parameterize the kernel's IMR lock logic
From
Date
On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 08:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So why not simply do the patch below? Very few people use boot
> parameters, and the
> complexity does not seem to be worth it.
>
> Furthermore I think an IMR range in itself is safe enough - it's not
> like such
> register state is going to be randomly corrupted, even with the
> 'lock' bit unset.


Hi Ingo.

I agree - to flip the lock bit you need to be in ring-0 anyway.

> So it's a perfectly fine protective measure against accidental memory
> corruption
> from the DMA space. It should not try to be more than that.
>
> And once we do this, I suggest we get rid of the 'lock' parameter
> altogether -
> that will further simplify the code.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo

That was the V1 of this patch

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/linux.kernel/6ZuVOF3TJow

Andriy asked for the boot parameter to control the state of the IMR
lock bit, I'm just as happy to go back to that version TBH



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-02-18 11:41    [W:0.050 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site