Re: [Lguest] lguest: unhandled trap

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Mon Oct 20 2008 - 03:54:14 EST

* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> i think Xen can withstand DMI scanning just fine.
>> without having seen any background, my general feeling is that lguest
>> should either do what Xen does and reserve the classic BIOS ranges
>> that we probe - or we should make DMI scanning more robust by making
>> sure real RAM ranges are never probed. (only ranges that the BIOS
>> itself marks as reserved in the e820 map)
> We considered doing that, but decided that there was so many other
> pieces of code around the place that assume that the ISA area is
> special, that just reserving it was the best course of action.

yeah - for _any_ virtual machine environment it's beneficial to look as
much like a normal PC as possible, because normal PCs is where the code
gets tested most.

Nevertheless if this is the only current roadblock for lguest then i
wouldnt find it objectionable to make DMI scanning more robust that way
- the two are complimentary. [ With an initial transitionary period of
generating printks and WARN()s when we try to scan general RAM areas. ]

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at