[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <478CB75B.70503@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:38:35 -0500
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/3] i386 boot: replace boot_ioremap with enhanced
bt_ioremap
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>
>> I did a quick scan over the patchset (not quite awake yet, so I may
>> very well have missed something), but it looks like EFI (again!) is
>> the only user of ioremapping before paging_init(). This makes me
>> wonder if that code can't be restructured so that isn't necessary.
>
> i think that in general making access to unmapped memory a bit easier is
> generally a good robustness idea as ACPI could be impacted by it as
> well.
>
> Fundamentally, paging_init() has obvious dependency on "figuring out the
> memory setup" of the box, and "figuring out the memory setup" means
> interpreting various data structures passed in by the BIOS - some of
> which might be in not yet mapped areas or iommu areas (if we have to do
> some early quirk). So having a robust implementation of ioremap_early()
> sounds like a definitive plus.
>
Fair enough. If it's generally useful, I certainly have no objections.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists