[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151218115224.GE29219@leverpostej>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:52:24 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
"ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org" <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
"matt@...eblueprint.co.uk" <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
"dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: "Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory)" <elliott@....com>,
"Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>,
"Knippers, Linda" <linda.knippers@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: arm64/efi handling of persistent memory
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:06:51AM +0000, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 01:33:25AM +0000, Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory) wrote:
> > Similar to the questions about the arm64 efi boot stub
> > handing persistent memory, some of the arm64 kernel code
> > looks fishy.
[...]
> > 2. is_reserve_region() treating EFI_PERSISTENT_MEMORY the same
> > as EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY looks wrong.
>
> Yeah... That one was introduced by
> ad5fb870c486 ("e820, efi: add ACPI 6.0 persistent memory types")
> without any ACKs from ARM people :/
Do we need to do anythign to avoid his kind of thing in future? e.g. a
MAINTAINERS patch for the ARM EFI bits?
Or do we just need to pay attention to linux-efi?
Mark.
--
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