Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 30 Apr 2016 21:44:20 +0100 | From | Matt Fleming <> | Subject | Re: efi_enabled(EFI_PARAVIRT) use |
| |
On Sat, 30 Apr, at 10:14:42PM, Shannon Zhao wrote: > Sure. How should I add this change? Rework this patch or add new one on > top of it?
Rework this patch, please.
> Yes, in this patch we could set EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES flag in > fdt_find_hyper_node instead of setting EFI_PARAVIRT flag, and then bail > out early in arm_enable_runtime_services() as you said. Then call > xen_efi_runtime_setup() in xen_guest_init().
Sounds good.
> While I still have a question, in this patch we use > efi_enabled(EFI_PARAVIRT) as a condition to make fdt_find_uefi_params() > and efi_get_fdt_params() execute different ways. So it needs to find a > new condition for that if we need to get rid of EFI_PARAVIRT. One I > think is that xen_initial_domain() check. Is that fine?
Hmm... why do you actually need to check whether you're running on a PV machine in fdt_find_uefi_params()? Can't you infer that from the DT params you discover?
I could understand maybe only accepting the "xen,uefi-system-table" property if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN) but surely you don't also need to filter based on whether you're booting a PV kernel?
Let me put it this way: when would you see "xen,uefi-system-table" and *not* be booting a PV kernel?
| |