From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, matt.fleming@linux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: use EFI to deal with platform wall clock
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 14:07:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120516130700.GA21499@srcf.ucam.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FB3C0ED020000780008418E@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 01:59:57PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 16.05.12 at 14:39, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> > Could you elaborate on that a little?
>
> There are systems where RAM on individual nodes is always
> starting at e.g. a 1Tb boundary. Obviously there can (at
> least theoretically) be anything in between, and hence
> assuming that __va() is usable here is simply wrong, as likely
> no mapping was created at all for the hole space (or if there
> is one, it would conflict with the one to be established here
> in the EfiMemoryMappedIO case).
Ok, that does sound like it needs fixing.
> > Platforms don't correctly deal with the case where you make physical
> > calls after ExitBootServices(). We tried running in physical mode. It
> > simply doesn't work.
>
> Interesting, especially as we're using physical mode exclusively so
> far in Xen. That's a platform issue though, and working around
> it by (silently!) sacrificing other functionality is questionable imo.
> It should at best be an option (default off), so that on systems
> where physical mode works, kexec can work too.
There was a patchset posted that provided that option. We experimented
with it in RHEL for a while and found that physical mode simply isn't
reliable - no other OS uses it, so it's entirely untested on most
platforms.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-16 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-15 12:18 [PATCH] x86-64: use EFI to deal with platform wall clock Jan Beulich
2012-05-15 12:47 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-05-15 13:19 ` Jan Beulich
2012-05-15 13:20 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-05-16 12:18 ` Jan Beulich
2012-05-16 12:39 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-05-16 12:59 ` Jan Beulich
2012-05-16 13:07 ` Matthew Garrett [this message]
2012-05-17 8:31 ` Matt Fleming
2012-05-25 15:00 ` Jan Beulich
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-05-25 15:20 Jan Beulich
2012-05-25 15:24 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-05-25 15:30 ` Jan Beulich
2012-05-25 15:34 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-06-06 9:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-05-26 10:26 ` Matt Fleming
2012-06-04 8:11 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120516130700.GA21499@srcf.ucam.org \
--to=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.