lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] x86: Exclude E820_RESERVED regions and memory holes above 4 GB from direct mapping.
On 12/16/2011 09:42 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> no, you change the meaning max_low_pfn_mapped and max_pfn_mapped for x86_64 at least.
>
> before your patch:
> max_low_pfn_mapped is the mapped pfn beblow 4g.
> max_pfn_mapped: is mapped pfn.
>
> after your patch, those two variables does not mean the memory [0, max_low_pfn_mapped) and [4g<<12, max_pfn_mapped)
> are really mapped.
>

And that's exactly the problem. It is BROKEN -- as in fundamentally
dangerous -- for these mappings to exist. It is because the model is
too inflexible.

> so in arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
>
> if (end_pfn<= max_low_pfn_mapped
> || (end_pfn> (1UL<< (32 - PAGE_SHIFT))
> && end_pfn<= max_pfn_mapped))
> va = __va(md->phys_addr);
> else
> va = efi_ioremap(md->phys_addr, size, md->type);
>
>
> and others will have problem.
>
> to solve your problem:
> 1. unmap the HT range ?
> 2. or introduce mapped_pfn_range array?

1 is fundamentally a braindead hack that solves one case without solving
the overall problem.

For 2 - why can't we simply make the invariant that E820_RAM is mapped
and nothing else, with the sole exceptions being the 1 MiB (fixed MTRR)?

For things like efi.c we should make sure to have interfaces instead of
open-code this kind of stuff.

-hpa



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-16 18:57    [W:0.140 / U:0.392 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site