[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48568B56.7060307@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:48:38 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
CC: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
yhlu.kernel@...il.com, steiner@....com, travis@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andi@...stfloor.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] x86 boot: allow overlapping ebda and efi memmap memory
ranges
Huang, Ying wrote:
>>> Or do not reserve EBDA on EFI system.
>> I suppose. This would have been a bigger change than I could
>> suggest. For all I know, there are existing systems using EBDA
>> and EFI together. Would this change break them?
>>
>> If you have good reason to know that's essentially impossible then
>> I have no objections, so far as my needs go, to not reserving EBDA
>> on EFI systems.
>
> I think if EBDA area is used in EFI system, it should be reserved in EFI
> memory map.
Realistically, we need the infrastructure to be able to make paranoia
reservations, and you need to be able to deal with later finding they
are actually in use. That's part of why we *make* paranoia
reservations. It's not acceptable to say "oh, it's EFI, we don't need
it" -- that's equivalent to saying "oh, EFI firmware won't have any
bugs." Although I know there are plenty of EFI fanboys who seem to have
that idea, I consider it about as likely as the tooth fairy.
-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