On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:19 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:00 PM Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 04:36:31PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 8:47 PM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > There is some care that should be taken to make sure we get the order
> > > > > right, but I don't see a fundamental issue here.
> > >
> > > Me neither.
> > >
> > > > > If I understand correctly, Rafael's concern is about changing the parts of
> > > > > ACPICA that should be OS agnostic, so I think we just need another place to
> > > > > call memblock_reserve() rather than acpi_tb_install_table_with_override().
> > >
> > > Something like this.
> > >
> > > There is also the problem that memblock_reserve() needs to be called
> > > for all of the tables early enough, which will require some reordering
> > > of the early init code.
> > >
> > > > > Since the reservation should be done early in x86::setup_arch() (and
> > > > > probably in arm64::setup_arch()) we might just have a function that parses
> > > > > table headers and reserves them, similarly to how we parse the tables
> > > > > during KASLR setup.
> > >
> > > Right.
> >
> > I've looked at it a bit more and we do something like the patch below that
> > nearly duplicates acpi_tb_parse_root_table() which is not very nice.
>
> It looks to me that the code need not be duplicated (see below).
>
> > Besides, reserving ACPI tables early and then calling acpi_table_init()
> > (and acpi_tb_parse_root_table() again would mean doing the dance with
> > early_memremap() twice for no good reason.
>
> That'd be simply inefficient which is kind of acceptable to me to start with.
>
> And I changing the ACPICA code can be avoided at least initially, it
> by itself would be a good enough reason.
>
> > I believe the most effective way to deal with this would be to have a
> > function that does parsing, reservation and installs the tables supplied by
> > the firmware which can be called really early and then another function
> > that overrides tables if needed a some later point.
>
> I agree that this should be the direction to go into.
>
> However, it looks to me that something like the following could be
> done to start with:
>
> (a) Make __acpi_map_table() call memblock_reserve() in addition to
> early_memremap().
>
> My assumption here is that the memblock_reserve() will simply be
> ignored if it is called too late.
>
> (b) Introduce acpi_reserve_tables() as something like
>
> void __init acpi_table_reserve(void)
> {
>         acpi_initialize_tables(initial_tables, ACPI_MAX_TABLES, 0);
> }
>
> Because initial_tables is passed to acpi_initialize_tables() above and
> allow_resize is 0, the array used by it will simply get overwritten
> when acpi_table_init() gets called.
>
> (c) Make setup_arch() call acpi_table_reserve() like in the original
> patch from George.
>
> Would that work?

Well, that doesn't work, so more digging ...