Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 May 2010 15:46:08 -0700 | From | Mike Travis <> | Subject | Re: [Patch 1/1] x86 efi: Fill all reserved memmap entries if add_efi_memmap specified. |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 05/25/2010 03:34 PM, Mike Travis wrote: >> >> H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> On 05/13/2010 02:55 PM, Mike Travis wrote: >>>> I saw that too, and wondered why e820_saved did not >>>> have the extra entries. The comment indicates it >>>> should. >>>> >>>> I'm on the system tonight and will investigate this >>>> further. >>>> >>> e820_saved lacks the extra entries because they aren't being passed in >>> from the bootloader, as they should, and instead you're using >>> add_efi_memmap which is, as far as the kernel is concerned, a post-boot >>> modification. >>> >>> That being said, add_efi_memmap does come from the firmware, and as such >>> it would be legitimate for it to add them to e820_saved. >>> >>> -hpa >> Did this last patch meet expectations? >> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127474230623061&w=4 >> > > I'm concerned about calling sanitize_e820_map() on e820_saved; it is > supposed to reflect the raw data as reported by the source, and > sanitizing it would corrupt that. > > -hpa
I wondered about that. Sanitize seems to remove adjacent entries, etc. making the map smaller, but I couldn't detect any real differences (though admittedly I didn't do a byte by byte comparison.)
But I'll submit another with that call removed.
Thanks, Mike
| |