From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 301C2C43461 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 18:26:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8E9121D43 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 18:26:08 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600280769; bh=tCwJf6pSywqZo1fO4aL4i9R+fquP41R+mQtn7D8AfE0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=0LUo19DvU26VNWKgsjMzdRu2oZlBTrA4wij/ekskap/rtzNR8/RDyq+Uf+qXbOBNn tmjcNPu/4YbsWUxoW3BOnbNXOFCHUvBMdqBwk2tvV6mn0P5Y+lHlzRPs5kWPy9Vvlv HNTLBd/kSs8x0embQhL/E6TfHk4Ao3CSLKPTOa+I= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727997AbgIPSZv (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2020 14:25:51 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56734 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727840AbgIPSZn (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2020 14:25:43 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f52.google.com (mail-ot1-f52.google.com [209.85.210.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B1923224DE for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:02:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600272135; bh=tCwJf6pSywqZo1fO4aL4i9R+fquP41R+mQtn7D8AfE0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=Hzg8tllsuNlKqYKb5LQGO+DnfkA47DQW6rzYwdkTJXvl6IqBCyNiLyWBXkD0QSD+a 70HIwIBbHVebNU3BhGqmlaL6jYdw6rvbfTVYdebyJbBmYmEim/sgVJUKo86WeO5Duw J6YMq5vhY3UMV0XqhX+xS70BFqPi6RC5c3X/A2Hg= Received: by mail-ot1-f52.google.com with SMTP id u25so7158315otq.6 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:02:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Wo5IBOWE9nZgsv3+HUdv0R6Y5Dyqh9bT1VSZ/GHm+genLwqCH OSlVpLFhN2Il+h9eNJ2385OHMnyEyoyF2x38KRY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzHQcjfnL1R78+CRmb+RB6VI2KqwH49wlb6zMuirheVm4GoPZcWiHjbFRFpM6uoUepxw5FqhzOcOlBFlalja+s= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:335:: with SMTP id 50mr2809851otv.90.1600272134492; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:02:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:02:03 +0300 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT 0/3] efi/libstub: arm32: Remove dependency on dram_base To: Palmer Dabbelt Cc: Atish Patra , linux-efi , Linux ARM , Maxim Uvarov , Heinrich Schuchardt , Atish Patra , Jens Wiklander , =?UTF-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Ozog?= , Etienne CARRIERE , Takahiro Akashi , Patrice CHOTARD , Sumit Garg , Grant Likely , Ilias Apalodimas , Christophe Priouzeau , Rouven Czerwinski , Patrick Delaunay Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-efi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 10:56, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 05:16, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:08:07 PDT (-0700), ardb@kernel.org wrote: > > > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 13:04, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > >> > > >> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 04:34, Atish Patra wrote: > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 2:44 PM Atish Patra wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:52 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Wed, 09 Sep 2020 08:16:20 PDT (-0700), ardb@kernel.org wrote: > > >> > > > > Maxim reports boot failures on platforms that describe reserved memory > > >> > > > > regions in DT that are disjoint from system DRAM, and which are converted > > >> > > > > to EfiReservedMemory regions by the EFI subsystem in u-boot. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > As it turns out, the whole notion of discovering the base of DRAM is > > >> > > > > problematic, and it would be better to simply rely on the EFI memory > > >> > > > > allocation routines instead, and derive the FDT and initrd allocation > > >> > > > > limits from the actual placement of the kernel (which is what defines > > >> > > > > the start of the linear region anyway) > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Finally, we should be able to get rid of get_dram_base() entirely. > > >> > > > > However, as RISC-V only just started using it, we will need to address > > >> > > > > that at a later time. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Looks like we're using dram_base to derive two argumets to > > >> > > > efi_relocate_kernel(): the preferred load address and the minimum load address. > > >> > > > I don't see any reason why we can't use the same PAGE_OFFSET-like logic that > > >> > > > x86 uses for the minimum load address, but I don't think we have any mechanism > > >> > > > like "struct boot_params" so we'd need to come up with something. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > As discussed in the other thread > > >> > > (https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-efi/msg20262.html), > > >> > > we don't need to do anything special. efi_relocate_kernel can just > > >> > > take preferred address as 0 > > >> > > so that efi_bs_alloc will fail and efi_low_alloc_above will be used to > > >> > > allocate 2MB/4MB aligned address as per requirement. > > >> > > > > >> > > I don't think the other changes in this series will cause any issue > > >> > > for RISC-V. I will test it and update anyways. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Cc: Maxim Uvarov > > >> > > > > Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt > > >> > > > > Cc: Atish Patra > > >> > > > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt > > >> > > > > Cc: Jens Wiklander > > >> > > > > Cc: Francois Ozog > > >> > > > > Cc: Etienne CARRIERE > > >> > > > > Cc: Takahiro Akashi > > >> > > > > Cc: Patrice CHOTARD > > >> > > > > Cc: Sumit Garg > > >> > > > > Cc: Grant Likely > > >> > > > > Cc: Ilias Apalodimas > > >> > > > > Cc: Christophe Priouzeau > > >> > > > > Cc: Rouven Czerwinski > > >> > > > > Cc: Patrick DELAUNAY > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Ard Biesheuvel (3): > > >> > > > > efi/libstub: Export efi_low_alloc_above() to other units > > >> > > > > efi/libstub: Use low allocation for the uncompressed kernel > > >> > > > > efi/libstub: base FDT and initrd placement on image address not DRAM > > >> > > > > base > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h | 6 +- > > >> > > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h | 2 +- > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm32-stub.c | 177 ++++---------------- > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub.c | 2 +- > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efistub.h | 3 + > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/relocate.c | 4 +- > > >> > > > > 6 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 147 deletions(-) > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > I verified the above patches along with the following RISC-V specific changes. > > >> > > > >> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h > > >> > index 93c305a638f4..dd6ceea9d548 100644 > > >> > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h > > >> > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h > > >> > @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static inline unsigned long > > >> > efi_get_max_fdt_addr(unsigned long dram_base) > > >> > static inline unsigned long efi_get_max_initrd_addr(unsigned long dram_base, > > >> > unsigned long image_addr) > > >> > { > > >> > - return dram_base + SZ_256M; > > >> > + return image_addr + SZ_256M; > > >> > } > > >> > > > >> > > >> Ah yes, we need this change as well - this is a bit unfortunate since > > >> that creates a conflict with the RISC-V tree. > > >> > > >> > --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/riscv-stub.c > > >> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/riscv-stub.c > > >> > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ efi_status_t handle_kernel_image(unsigned long *image_addr, > > >> > */ > > >> > preferred_addr = round_up(dram_base, MIN_KIMG_ALIGN) + MIN_KIMG_ALIGN; > > >> > status = efi_relocate_kernel(image_addr, kernel_size, *image_size, > > >> > - preferred_addr, MIN_KIMG_ALIGN, dram_base); > > >> > + 0, MIN_KIMG_ALIGN, 0); > > >> > > > >> > FWIW: Tested-by: Atish Patra > > >> > > >> Thanks for confirming. > > > > > > OK, > > > > > > So, just to annoy Palmer and you more than I already have up to this > > > point: any chance we could do a final respin of the RISC-V code on top > > > of these changes? They are important for ARM, and I would prefer these > > > to be merged in a way that makes it easy to backport them to -stable > > > if needed. > > > > > > So what I would suggest is: > > > - I will create a new 'shared-efi' tag/stable branch containing the > > > existing two patches, as well as these changes (in a slightly updated > > > form) > > > - Palmer creates a new topic branch in the riscv repo based on this > > > shared tag, and applies the [updated] RISC-V patches on top > > > - Palmer drops the current version of the riscv patches from > > > riscv/for-next, and merges the topic branch into it instead. > > > > > > Again, sorry to be a pain, but I think this is the cleanest way to get > > > these changes queued up for v5.10 without painting ourselves into a > > > corner too much when it comes to future follow-up changes. > > > > That's fine for me. > > Excellent. > > I have created a signed tag efi-riscv-shared-for-v5.10 in the EFI repo > [0], which is based on v5.9-rc1. Please merge that at the start of > your for-next/efi topic branch, and apply the reworked EFI for RISC-V > series on top. > Since this tag has not appeared in the riscv repo yet, and Atish's rebase was not sent to the list yet either, I have pushed a new version of this tag just now. If you want, I can send you a formal PR separately. > I have created a preliminary version of that branch as 'riscv-tmp' on > [1], incorporating some changes that are needed for the rebase. Note > that I applied some other tweaks as well - one is in a separate patch > on top, the other is that I omitted the Makefile rule for .stub.o > objects under arch/riscv/Makefile, as it is not actually used. > > Atish - please pick whatever seems useful to you from that branch when > you do the respin. > > Thanks, > Ard. > > > > [0] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi.git > [1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ardb/linux.git From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC12C43461 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:05:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBB2422242 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:05:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="oh4epFQ0"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Hzg8tlls" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DBB2422242 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=KhUsjaYnqSui+2a8nVf/AYrXAoyIkBKNv/Wk/DdkVgQ=; b=oh4epFQ0q2LmPZTEVdtc1C5Wu qpEvPDC8/sXni0lx2lZFjv+p1hKMxspAqQaq7R4t2xPGpMq+BKBdbo5e/Qc+HHUr2c5b2IkDYBOgt FzmD3UvHGb57mzWmTxI+7322wpCMalfexvJAqXP1gi+bt8znBpnS/kw6jvlr69WoyE97JyaGiB6Wm nkRO8sMoA+mneRl4t+oZSDxage7KNcISs1I8l2w611M9gdQzWA6+l1tUnS8qnUcBu9QpVto6tSat8 ZLQ03vXkuf8faNK9jdGh1Oxn1MfewsZWbvWVx2kG9uZ14sRsjadSJnhAQtlWLo+pEwXMGy1w5Zv0t GxzUeOSfg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kIZu9-0006ha-0z; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:03:33 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kIZsu-0005wa-9z for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:02:17 +0000 Received: from mail-ot1-f43.google.com (mail-ot1-f43.google.com [209.85.210.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CDDA221E3 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:02:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600272135; bh=tCwJf6pSywqZo1fO4aL4i9R+fquP41R+mQtn7D8AfE0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=Hzg8tllsuNlKqYKb5LQGO+DnfkA47DQW6rzYwdkTJXvl6IqBCyNiLyWBXkD0QSD+a 70HIwIBbHVebNU3BhGqmlaL6jYdw6rvbfTVYdebyJbBmYmEim/sgVJUKo86WeO5Duw J6YMq5vhY3UMV0XqhX+xS70BFqPi6RC5c3X/A2Hg= Received: by mail-ot1-f43.google.com with SMTP id o8so7197636otl.4 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:02:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hOEztG02jCgoQwh1n9PUYAH1MgN/k0LHmrlMaaaA0r4f+BCU8 qyo0ng4xzKv/9UkgeBiBOyaAuSCc59RCwYnWfpg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzHQcjfnL1R78+CRmb+RB6VI2KqwH49wlb6zMuirheVm4GoPZcWiHjbFRFpM6uoUepxw5FqhzOcOlBFlalja+s= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:335:: with SMTP id 50mr2809851otv.90.1600272134492; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:02:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:02:03 +0300 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT 0/3] efi/libstub: arm32: Remove dependency on dram_base To: Palmer Dabbelt X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200916_120216_542495_2B48F157 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 57.35 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Etienne CARRIERE , =?UTF-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Ozog?= , Maxim Uvarov , Grant Likely , Takahiro Akashi , Rouven Czerwinski , Heinrich Schuchardt , Ilias Apalodimas , Patrice CHOTARD , Patrick Delaunay , Atish Patra , linux-efi , Atish Patra , Christophe Priouzeau , Jens Wiklander , Linux ARM , Sumit Garg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 10:56, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 05:16, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:08:07 PDT (-0700), ardb@kernel.org wrote: > > > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 13:04, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > >> > > >> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 04:34, Atish Patra wrote: > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 2:44 PM Atish Patra wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:52 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Wed, 09 Sep 2020 08:16:20 PDT (-0700), ardb@kernel.org wrote: > > >> > > > > Maxim reports boot failures on platforms that describe reserved memory > > >> > > > > regions in DT that are disjoint from system DRAM, and which are converted > > >> > > > > to EfiReservedMemory regions by the EFI subsystem in u-boot. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > As it turns out, the whole notion of discovering the base of DRAM is > > >> > > > > problematic, and it would be better to simply rely on the EFI memory > > >> > > > > allocation routines instead, and derive the FDT and initrd allocation > > >> > > > > limits from the actual placement of the kernel (which is what defines > > >> > > > > the start of the linear region anyway) > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Finally, we should be able to get rid of get_dram_base() entirely. > > >> > > > > However, as RISC-V only just started using it, we will need to address > > >> > > > > that at a later time. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Looks like we're using dram_base to derive two argumets to > > >> > > > efi_relocate_kernel(): the preferred load address and the minimum load address. > > >> > > > I don't see any reason why we can't use the same PAGE_OFFSET-like logic that > > >> > > > x86 uses for the minimum load address, but I don't think we have any mechanism > > >> > > > like "struct boot_params" so we'd need to come up with something. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > As discussed in the other thread > > >> > > (https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-efi/msg20262.html), > > >> > > we don't need to do anything special. efi_relocate_kernel can just > > >> > > take preferred address as 0 > > >> > > so that efi_bs_alloc will fail and efi_low_alloc_above will be used to > > >> > > allocate 2MB/4MB aligned address as per requirement. > > >> > > > > >> > > I don't think the other changes in this series will cause any issue > > >> > > for RISC-V. I will test it and update anyways. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Cc: Maxim Uvarov > > >> > > > > Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt > > >> > > > > Cc: Atish Patra > > >> > > > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt > > >> > > > > Cc: Jens Wiklander > > >> > > > > Cc: Francois Ozog > > >> > > > > Cc: Etienne CARRIERE > > >> > > > > Cc: Takahiro Akashi > > >> > > > > Cc: Patrice CHOTARD > > >> > > > > Cc: Sumit Garg > > >> > > > > Cc: Grant Likely > > >> > > > > Cc: Ilias Apalodimas > > >> > > > > Cc: Christophe Priouzeau > > >> > > > > Cc: Rouven Czerwinski > > >> > > > > Cc: Patrick DELAUNAY > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Ard Biesheuvel (3): > > >> > > > > efi/libstub: Export efi_low_alloc_above() to other units > > >> > > > > efi/libstub: Use low allocation for the uncompressed kernel > > >> > > > > efi/libstub: base FDT and initrd placement on image address not DRAM > > >> > > > > base > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h | 6 +- > > >> > > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h | 2 +- > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm32-stub.c | 177 ++++---------------- > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub.c | 2 +- > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efistub.h | 3 + > > >> > > > > drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/relocate.c | 4 +- > > >> > > > > 6 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 147 deletions(-) > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > I verified the above patches along with the following RISC-V specific changes. > > >> > > > >> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h > > >> > index 93c305a638f4..dd6ceea9d548 100644 > > >> > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h > > >> > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/efi.h > > >> > @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static inline unsigned long > > >> > efi_get_max_fdt_addr(unsigned long dram_base) > > >> > static inline unsigned long efi_get_max_initrd_addr(unsigned long dram_base, > > >> > unsigned long image_addr) > > >> > { > > >> > - return dram_base + SZ_256M; > > >> > + return image_addr + SZ_256M; > > >> > } > > >> > > > >> > > >> Ah yes, we need this change as well - this is a bit unfortunate since > > >> that creates a conflict with the RISC-V tree. > > >> > > >> > --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/riscv-stub.c > > >> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/riscv-stub.c > > >> > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ efi_status_t handle_kernel_image(unsigned long *image_addr, > > >> > */ > > >> > preferred_addr = round_up(dram_base, MIN_KIMG_ALIGN) + MIN_KIMG_ALIGN; > > >> > status = efi_relocate_kernel(image_addr, kernel_size, *image_size, > > >> > - preferred_addr, MIN_KIMG_ALIGN, dram_base); > > >> > + 0, MIN_KIMG_ALIGN, 0); > > >> > > > >> > FWIW: Tested-by: Atish Patra > > >> > > >> Thanks for confirming. > > > > > > OK, > > > > > > So, just to annoy Palmer and you more than I already have up to this > > > point: any chance we could do a final respin of the RISC-V code on top > > > of these changes? They are important for ARM, and I would prefer these > > > to be merged in a way that makes it easy to backport them to -stable > > > if needed. > > > > > > So what I would suggest is: > > > - I will create a new 'shared-efi' tag/stable branch containing the > > > existing two patches, as well as these changes (in a slightly updated > > > form) > > > - Palmer creates a new topic branch in the riscv repo based on this > > > shared tag, and applies the [updated] RISC-V patches on top > > > - Palmer drops the current version of the riscv patches from > > > riscv/for-next, and merges the topic branch into it instead. > > > > > > Again, sorry to be a pain, but I think this is the cleanest way to get > > > these changes queued up for v5.10 without painting ourselves into a > > > corner too much when it comes to future follow-up changes. > > > > That's fine for me. > > Excellent. > > I have created a signed tag efi-riscv-shared-for-v5.10 in the EFI repo > [0], which is based on v5.9-rc1. Please merge that at the start of > your for-next/efi topic branch, and apply the reworked EFI for RISC-V > series on top. > Since this tag has not appeared in the riscv repo yet, and Atish's rebase was not sent to the list yet either, I have pushed a new version of this tag just now. If you want, I can send you a formal PR separately. > I have created a preliminary version of that branch as 'riscv-tmp' on > [1], incorporating some changes that are needed for the rebase. Note > that I applied some other tweaks as well - one is in a separate patch > on top, the other is that I omitted the Makefile rule for .stub.o > objects under arch/riscv/Makefile, as it is not actually used. > > Atish - please pick whatever seems useful to you from that branch when > you do the respin. > > Thanks, > Ard. > > > > [0] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi.git > [1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ardb/linux.git _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel