From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, vishal.l.verma@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/10] x86, efi: Add efi_fake_mem support for EFI_MEMORY_SP
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 08:48:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190910064826.GA23659@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <156712996407.1616117.11409311856083390862.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
* Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> Given that EFI_MEMORY_SP is platform BIOS policy descision for marking
> memory ranges as "reserved for a specific purpose" there will inevitably
> be scenarios where the BIOS omits the attribute in situations where it
> is desired. Unlike other attributes if the OS wants to reserve this
> memory from the kernel the reservation needs to happen early in init. So
> early, in fact, that it needs to happen before e820__memblock_setup()
> which is a pre-requisite for efi_fake_memmap() that wants to allocate
> memory for the updated table.
>
> Introduce an x86 specific efi_fake_memmap_early() that can search for
> attempts to set EFI_MEMORY_SP via efi_fake_mem and update the e820 table
> accordingly.
>
> The KASLR code that scans the command line looking for user-directed
> memory reservations also needs to be updated to consider
> "efi_fake_mem=nn@ss:0x40000" requests.
>
> Cc: <x86@kernel.org>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
A couple of these patches are touching EFI code, but only the first one
carries a Reviewed-by from Ard.
Ard, are these patches and the whole series fine with you?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-10 6:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-30 1:52 [PATCH v5 00/10] EFI Specific Purpose Memory Support Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 01/10] acpi/numa: Establish a new drivers/acpi/numa/ directory Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] efi: Enumerate EFI_MEMORY_SP Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 03/10] x86, efi: Push EFI_MEMMAP check into leaf routines Dan Williams
2019-09-13 9:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-09-13 12:32 ` Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] x86, efi: Reserve UEFI 2.8 Specific Purpose Memory for dax Dan Williams
2019-09-13 12:59 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-09-13 16:22 ` Dan Williams
2019-09-13 16:28 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-09-13 16:39 ` Dan Williams
2019-09-13 17:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-09-13 17:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 05/10] x86, efi: Add efi_fake_mem support for EFI_MEMORY_SP Dan Williams
2019-09-10 6:48 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2019-09-13 13:02 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-09-13 15:02 ` Dan Williams
2019-09-13 19:48 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-09-13 20:43 ` Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 06/10] lib: Uplevel the pmem "region" ida to a global allocator Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:52 ` [PATCH v5 07/10] dax: Fix alloc_dax_region() compile warning Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:53 ` [PATCH v5 08/10] device-dax: Add a driver for "hmem" devices Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:53 ` [PATCH v5 09/10] acpi/numa/hmat: Register HMAT at device_initcall level Dan Williams
2019-08-30 1:53 ` [PATCH v5 10/10] acpi/numa/hmat: Register "soft reserved" memory as an "hmem" device Dan Williams
2019-09-02 11:09 ` [PATCH v5 00/10] EFI Specific Purpose Memory Support Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-09-04 23:06 ` Dan Williams
2019-09-06 11:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-10-03 15:43 ` Jonathan Cameron
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190910064826.GA23659@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).