[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170112213354.GC2709@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 05:33:54 +0800
From: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Mika Penttilä <mika.penttila@...tfour.com>,
bhsharma@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] efi/x86: move efi bgrt init code to early init code
On 01/12/17 at 04:20pm, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 12 January 2017 at 09:41, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Before invoking the arch specific handler, efi_mem_reserve() reserves
> > the given memory region through memblock.
> >
> > efi_bgrt_init will call efi_mem_reserve after mm_init(), at that time
> > memblock is dead and it should not be used any more.
> >
> > efi bgrt code depend on acpi intialization to get the bgrt acpi table,
> > moving bgrt parsing to acpi early boot code can make sure efi_mem_reserve
> > in efi bgrt code still use memblock safely.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
>
> I know this is probably out of scope for you, but since we're moving
> things around, any chance we could do so in a manner that will enable
> BGRT support for arm64/ACPI? Happy to test/collaborate on this.
>
I'm happy to do so, Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com> said he had
some investigation on that already, I would like to ask him to help on that.
Already cced him..
Thanks
Dave
Powered by blists - more mailing lists