From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@linux.intel.com, rjw@sisk.pl,
linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS calls -- infrastructure
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 07:59:57 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904120754240.4583@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49E17A6E.5000104@zytor.com>
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> The main thing you could do is drop or virtualize memory accesses to RAM it
> should never access in the first place, like some BIOSes which scribble over
> random locations in low memory.
Please don't.
This discussion is just taking us down a rat-hole of more complexity, and
_way_ more fragility.
I'm absolutely willing to bet that trying to do the BIOS calls will break
way more than it will fix. Sure, it will probably work for 99.9% of all
BIOSes, but then it will break horribly for some BIOS that tries to do
something "clever". SMM has already been mentioned as an example of
something that simply isn't virtualizable.
Timing is another, very traditional, one. There used to be video BIOSes
that simply didn't work in a dosbox-like environment because they had
tight timing loops that were coupled to hardware. I can pretty much
guarantee that that has gone away as far as the video BIOS is concerned,
but the main BIOS? Who the hell knows.
Sure, none of the calls we do to the BIOS from the kernel should need
anything fancy at all, and maybe I'm pessimistic. But at the same time, I
really don't think the BIOS calls are worth that kind of infrastructure.
Sure, go ahead and wrap them in some kind of "save and restore all
registers" wrapping, but nothing fancier than that. It would just be
overkill, and likely to break more than it fixes.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-12 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-09 23:06 [PATCH 0/6] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-09 23:12 ` [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS calls -- infrastructure H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-10 8:04 ` Pavel Machek
2009-04-10 10:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-10 10:46 ` Pavel Machek
2009-04-10 11:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-10 11:38 ` Pavel Machek
2009-04-10 11:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-11 16:13 ` Avi Kivity
2009-04-12 5:21 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-12 14:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-12 14:39 ` Avi Kivity
2009-04-12 14:59 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-04-12 16:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-12 18:57 ` Avi Kivity
2009-04-13 4:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-13 4:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-13 16:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-13 16:57 ` Pavel Machek
2009-04-13 17:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-13 18:34 ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-13 19:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-14 0:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-14 4:42 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-14 9:03 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-04-14 15:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-13 6:44 ` Avi Kivity
2009-04-12 17:51 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-10 17:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-10 17:19 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-09 23:13 ` [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts in the core boot code H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-09 23:13 ` [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts in the APM code H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-09 23:13 ` [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts in the EDD code H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-09 23:13 ` [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts in the MCA code H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-09 23:13 ` [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts in the video code H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-10 8:05 ` Pavel Machek
2009-04-10 18:05 ` [PATCH 0/6] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.00.0904120754240.4583@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome