From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753608AbcD2OxY (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:53:24 -0400
Received: from mail-io0-f173.google.com ([209.85.223.173]:35042 "EHLO
	mail-io0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752964AbcD2OxW (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:53:22 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160429143931.GG2839@codeblueprint.co.uk>
References: <20160429142020.4499e185@canb.auug.org.au>
	<20160429063936.GA28320@gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.10.1604291123260.3312@sstabellini-ThinkPad-X260>
	<20160429143931.GG2839@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:53:21 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu_k45_r0mke6ELb3Pi05BnJiEMqweJRfsy7S55FzCpF7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: efi_enabled(EFI_PARAVIRT) use
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
        Xen Devel <Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 29 April 2016 at 16:39, Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr, at 11:34:45AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > Also, it would be nice to have all things EFI in a single tree, the conflicts are
>> > going to be painful! There's very little reason not to carry this kind of commit:
>> >
>> >  arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c           |  6 +++++
>> >  drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c | 17 +++++++++-----
>> >  drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c         | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>> >  3 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > in the EFI tree.
>>
>> That's true. I'll drop this commit from xentip and let Matt pick it up
>> or request changes as he sees fit.
>
> One small change I think would be sensible to make is to expand
> EFI_PARAVIRT into a few more bits to clearly indicate the quirks on
> Xen, and in the process, to delete EFI_PARAVIRT.
>
> That should address Ingo's major concern, and also make it much easier
> to rework the code in a piecemeal fashion.
>
> Could somebody enumerate the things that make Xen (dom0) different on
> arm* compared with bare metal EFI boot? The list I made for x86 was,
>
>   1. Has no EFI memory map
>   2. Runtime regions do not need to be mapped
>   3. Cannot call SetVirtualAddressMap()
>   4. /sys/firmware/efi/fw_vendor is invisible
>
> The first maps to not setting EFI_MEMMAP, the second to not setting
> EFI_RUNTIME. If we add EFI_ALREADY_VIRTUAL and EFI_FW_VENDOR_INVISIBLE
> to efi.flags that should cover everything on x86. Does arm* require
> anything else?

I already proposed when this patch was first under review to make the
arm_enable_runtime_services() function bail early without error if the
EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES flag is already set, and the xen code could set
that bit as well when it installs its paravirtualized alternatives. I
don't remember exactly why that was shot down, though, but I think it
is the only reason this code introduces references to EFI_PARAVIRT in
the first place.