From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/EFI: additional checks in efi_bgrt_init() Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:52:04 +0000 Message-ID: <20121107145204.GA30662@srcf.ucam.org> References: <5097E8C102000078000A661B@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20121105183751.GA9031@jtriplet-mobl1> <20121105184346.GA13508@srcf.ucam.org> <20121105190047.GA9295@jtriplet-mobl1> <509A82E402000078000A6FC8@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <509A82E402000078000A6FC8-ce6RLXgGx+vWGUEhTRrCg1aTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Josh Triplett , mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org, tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org, linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:48:52PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > On my system, the table points to EfiReservedMemoryType > and appears to have valid data despite the valid flag being > clear. But before encoding the invalidation into Xen in a form > other than clearing the valid bit, I'd really like to get > confirmation that e.g. clearing the image address is indeed a > "proper" thing to do. If no-one among you can "officially" tell > what the intentions here are, would you know who can? If you don't want to provide it at all, just don't provide a BGRT. Microsoft wrote that bit of the ACPI spec, so you'd probably need to ask them what their intentions were. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org