Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping

[Borislav Petkov]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 07:10:15PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Because Windows passes high addresses to SetVirtualAddressMap(), and
> because if you can imagine firmware developers getting it wrong then
> firmware developers will have got it wrong.

Can we reversely assume that if we'd used fixed high offsets, as hpa
suggests, then it'll be fine? IOW, are any high addresses, even fixed
ones, fine?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/