This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH][0/4] Intel(R) Trusted Execution Technologys

To: "Cihula, Joseph" <joseph.cihula@xxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH][0/4] Intel(R) Trusted Execution Technologysupport: Overview
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:47:26 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Zhai, Edwin" <edwin.zhai@xxxxxxxxx>, "Xu, James" <james.xu@xxxxxxxxx>, "Wang, Shane" <shane.wang@xxxxxxxxx>, xense-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 03:05:14 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <D936D925018D154694D8A362EEB08920024A1B04@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcfqJS1qa85J3FYYEdyVXAAX8io7RQAOFci6AACkcnAAIqvLDg==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH][0/4] Intel(R) Trusted Execution Technologysupport: Overview
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 29/8/07 22:52, "Cihula, Joseph" <joseph.cihula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> o  The new patch doesn't misuse, IMHO, the ACPI memory types.  By using
> a type that is intended to indicate memory that is not usable by the
> system, it allows kernels/VMMs that are not aware of sboot to still
> treat these memory regions properly.

Oh, I see that this extra type is defined by ACPI 3. That makes it quite
reasonable to use then, assuming there are no mad BIOSes that abuse this new
type. I guess we should cross that bridge only if we come to it.

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list