[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aVtQHftDmENIAxrb@sumit-xelite>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2026 11:16:05 +0530
From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...nel.org>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
konradybcio@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, akhilpo@....qualcomm.com,
vikash.garodia@....qualcomm.com, dikshita.agarwal@....qualcomm.com,
robin.clark@....qualcomm.com, lumag@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: agatti: Address Gunyah memory
alignment needs
On Sat, Jan 03, 2026 at 09:49:04AM -0600, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2025 at 12:42:58PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@....qualcomm.com>
> >
> > Gunyah hypervisor requires it's memory start address to be 2MB aligned.
> > So the address map for Agatti is updated to incorporate that requirement.
> > This should be a backwards compatible DT change which should work with
> > legacy QHEE based firmware stack too.
> >
>
> How come this isn't conveyed to the operating system using the UEFI
> memory map?
>
I agree that with EFI boot, the information is getting conveyed via EFI
memory map. But there will be non-EFI boot scenarios as well in case of
U-Boot. And moreover I suppose we need to keep the reserved memory
ranges in DT updated to reflect the actual memory map.
-Sumit
Powered by blists - more mailing lists