[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Patch 1/1] x86 efi: Fill all reserved memmap entries if add_efi_memmap specified.

Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Mike Travis <> wrote:
>> 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?
>>> 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.
> can you use updated boot loader instead?
> Also we should drop add_efi_memmap if possible.
> YH

I'm open for suggestions on how to improve this, but we are shipping
systems very soon and I don't think we'll get any other change into
the system until the next update.


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-26 19:45    [W:0.065 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site