[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <5332E6AE02000078000025F0@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 13:39:42 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Matt Fleming" <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc: <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
<stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>, <jeremy@...p.org>,
<fenghua.yu@...el.com>, <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
<tony.luck@...el.com>, <x86@...nel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
"Daniel Kiper" <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
<eshelton@...ox.com>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
<linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] x86: Call efi_memblock_x86_reserve_range()
on native EFI platform only
>>> On 26.03.14 at 14:31, <matt@...sole-pimps.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Mar, at 01:22:49PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 26.03.14 at 14:00, <matt@...sole-pimps.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > This could do with a little bit more explanation. Why is it not
>> > necessary to mark the EFI memory map that was passed to the kernel as
>> > reserved in memblock?
>>
>> Because that's in memory Dom0 doesn't even see: The EFI memory
>> map is visible to the hypervisor only.
>
> So where does boot_params.efi_info.efi_memmap point?
>
> If nowhere (i.e. it's NULL) that's no problem because memblock_reserve()
> handles zero size regions just fine.
That's a question to Daniel - in our implementation (with a separate
Xen kernel that can't run on bare hardware) boot_params as a whole
simply doesn't exist.
Jan
--
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