Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 May 2006 10:57:14 +0900 | From | "Magnus Damm" <> | Subject | Re: [Fastboot] [PATCH 00/03] kexec: Avoid overwriting the current pgd (V2) |
| |
On 5/26/06, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote: > "Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@gmail.com> writes: > > > > Also, I feel that my approach with a valid idt and gdt is more robust. > > One of my biggest concerns with the current code is that it is not > sufficiently robust, in the kdump case. So I am all in favor things > that improve that situation. At the same time just moving code from C > to assembly doesn't make it more robust, especially when the comments > explaining what the code does don't come along.
I agree that just moving the code does not help. But my code actually loads a new set of gdts and idts and I'm hoping that it will improve the robustness.
Regarding more comments I totally agree with you.
> >> The big problem was you did several things with a single patch, > >> and that made the review much more difficult than it had to be. > >> > >> Having to check if you correctly modified the page tables, while also > >> having to check for segmentation, and the interrupt descriptor > >> transformations was distracting. > > > > Let me know which parts you think are good and we will implement and > > review them bit by bit instead then. > > Skip the infrastructure changes, and the rest looks like real > possibilities.
But I need to store my page tables somewhere, and there is no good place to store them now. With good reasoning I can be convinced that storing things on the control page is a good thing, and I'd like to agree on something, but without good reasoning I will continue to think that the control page solution is overly complex.
Thanks,
/ magnus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |