On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:24:31PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 09.10.2019 14:21, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki  wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:07:05PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 09.10.2019 13:52, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki  wrote:
> >>> I'm talking about Xen->Xen transition here. How system table pointer is
> >>> passed from old Xen to new Xen instance? And how the new Xen instance
> >>> deals with boot services being not available anymore?
> >>
> >> It doesn't. I should better have said "* -> Xen transitions" in
> >> my earlier reply. I simply can't see how this can all work with
> >> EFI underneath without some extra conveying of data from the old
> >> to the new instance.
> > 
> > Does it mean the whole discussion about SetVirtualAddressMap() being
> > incompatible with kexec is moot, because runtime services (including
> > SetVirtualAddressMap()) are not used by Xen after kexec anyway? If I
> > understand correctly, you just said the Xen after kexec don't have
> > runtime services pointer.
> 
> The concern is about kexec-ing to Linux (based on what I recall
> from when I wrote this code; as said the situation may have
> changed for modern Linux).

But then, Linux won't have EFI system table pointer either, no? I don't
see Xen passing it over in any way.

-- 
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?