lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm: Add [U]EFI runtime services support
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 03:07:39PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * If you need to (temporarily) support buggy firmware.
> > + */
> > +#define KEEP_BOOT_SERVICES_REGIONS
>
> Have you seen firmware that requires this? I'm just curious more than
> anything else.

Not really.
I _think_ I saw it on a debug build of a development platform once.
That coincided with me seeing a post on linux-efi about some laptop
that broke unless boot services regions were preserved, so I decided
to put it in there for any future debugging.

> > +/*
> > + * Returns 1 if 'facility' is enabled, 0 otherwise.
> > + */
> > +int efi_enabled(int facility)
> > +{
> > + return test_bit(facility, &arm_efi_facility) != 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(efi_enabled);
>
> This should move to drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c. Let me write a patch
> that moves the x86 stuff out of arch/x86 and means you can get rid of
> this hunk.

Excellent, thanks!

> > +/*
> > + * Called explicitly from init/mm.c
> > + */
>
> That's init/main.c.

*cough*, right.

> > +void __init efi_enter_virtual_mode(void)
> > +{
> > + efi_status_t status;
> > +
> > + if (!efi_enabled(EFI_BOOT)) {
> > + pr_info("EFI services will not be available.\n");
> > + return;
>
> This is dead code as PATCH 3 does,
>
> diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
> index af310af..ec6d76e 100644
> --- a/init/main.c
> +++ b/init/main.c
> @@ -875,6 +875,10 @@ static noinline void __init
> kernel_init_freeable(void)
> smp_prepare_cpus(setup_max_cpus);
>
> do_pre_smp_initcalls();
> +
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM) && efi_enabled(EFI_BOOT))
> + efi_enter_virtual_mode();
> +

True.

However, this call site is likely to change in the future (preferably
to an early_initcall), if we redesign the memory mapping to be reusable
after kexec(). At which point the test in efi_enter_virtual_mode() will
make sense again.

Could I change the test in init/main.c to do
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI))
instead?

/
Leif


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-17 20:41    [W:0.065 / U:12.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site