linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: agatti: Address Gunyah memory alignment needs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <73bcf4c8-3d49-4b55-a771-0c5c1ef54380@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 12:29:02 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...nel.org>, 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 1/5/26 6:46 AM, Sumit Garg wrote:
> 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.

Can U-Boot not do the same by altering /reserved-memory or /memory/reg?

Konrad