From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>,
Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>,
"Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org>,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] efi/arm: map UEFI memory map earlier on boot
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 17:48:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180705164824.GA7445@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec1a5f0f-99e3-fda1-9a64-5c2539817190@arm.com>
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 12:02:15PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> On 05/07/18 10:43, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 08:49:32PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> On 4 July 2018 at 19:06, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:44:23PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >>>> Since arm_enter_runtime_services() was modified to always create a virtual
> >>>> mapping of UEFI memory map in the previous patch, it is now renamed to
> >>>> efi_enter_virtual_mode() and called earlier before acpi_load_tables()
> >>>> in acpi_early_init().
> >>>>
> >>>> This will allow us to use UEFI memory map in acpi_os_ioremap() to create
> >>>> mappings of ACPI tables using memory attributes described in UEFI memory
> >>>> map.
>
> >>> Hmm, this is ugly as hell. Is there nothing else we can piggy-back off?
> >>> It's also fairly jarring that, on x86, efi_enter_virtual_mode() is called
> >>> a few lines later, *after* acpi_early_init() has been called.
>
> >> Currently, there is a gap where we have already torn down the early
> >> mapping and haven't created the definitive mapping of the UEFI memory
> >> map. There are other reasons why this is an issue, and I recently
> >> proposed [0] myself to address one of them
>
> >> Akashi-san, could you please confirm whether the patch below would be
> >> sufficient for you? Apologies for going back and forth on this, but I
> >> agree with Will that we should try to avoid warts like the one above
> >> in generic code.
> >>
> >> [0] https://marc.info/?l=linux-efi&m=152930773507524&w=2
> >
> > I think that this patch will also work.
> > Please drop my patch#2 and #3 if you want to pick up my patchset, Will.
>
> Patch 2 is what changes arm_enable_runtime_services() to map the efi memory map
> before bailing out due to efi=noruntime.
>
> Without it, 'efi=noruntime' means no-acpi-tables.
So it sounds like we want patch 2. Akashi, given that this series is only
four patches, please can you send out a v3 with the stuff that should be
reviewed and merged? Otherwise, there's a real risk we end up with breakage
that goes unnoticed initially.
Thanks,
Will
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/4] efi/arm: map UEFI memory map earlier on boot
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 17:48:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180705164824.GA7445@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec1a5f0f-99e3-fda1-9a64-5c2539817190@arm.com>
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 12:02:15PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> On 05/07/18 10:43, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 08:49:32PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> On 4 July 2018 at 19:06, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:44:23PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >>>> Since arm_enter_runtime_services() was modified to always create a virtual
> >>>> mapping of UEFI memory map in the previous patch, it is now renamed to
> >>>> efi_enter_virtual_mode() and called earlier before acpi_load_tables()
> >>>> in acpi_early_init().
> >>>>
> >>>> This will allow us to use UEFI memory map in acpi_os_ioremap() to create
> >>>> mappings of ACPI tables using memory attributes described in UEFI memory
> >>>> map.
>
> >>> Hmm, this is ugly as hell. Is there nothing else we can piggy-back off?
> >>> It's also fairly jarring that, on x86, efi_enter_virtual_mode() is called
> >>> a few lines later, *after* acpi_early_init() has been called.
>
> >> Currently, there is a gap where we have already torn down the early
> >> mapping and haven't created the definitive mapping of the UEFI memory
> >> map. There are other reasons why this is an issue, and I recently
> >> proposed [0] myself to address one of them
>
> >> Akashi-san, could you please confirm whether the patch below would be
> >> sufficient for you? Apologies for going back and forth on this, but I
> >> agree with Will that we should try to avoid warts like the one above
> >> in generic code.
> >>
> >> [0] https://marc.info/?l=linux-efi&m=152930773507524&w=2
> >
> > I think that this patch will also work.
> > Please drop my patch#2 and #3 if you want to pick up my patchset, Will.
>
> Patch 2 is what changes arm_enable_runtime_services() to map the efi memory map
> before bailing out due to efi=noruntime.
>
> Without it, 'efi=noruntime' means no-acpi-tables.
So it sounds like we want patch 2. Akashi, given that this series is only
four patches, please can you send out a v3 with the stuff that should be
reviewed and merged? Otherwise, there's a real risk we end up with breakage
that goes unnoticed initially.
Thanks,
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>,
Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] efi/arm: map UEFI memory map earlier on boot
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 17:48:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180705164824.GA7445@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec1a5f0f-99e3-fda1-9a64-5c2539817190@arm.com>
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 12:02:15PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> On 05/07/18 10:43, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 08:49:32PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> On 4 July 2018 at 19:06, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:44:23PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >>>> Since arm_enter_runtime_services() was modified to always create a virtual
> >>>> mapping of UEFI memory map in the previous patch, it is now renamed to
> >>>> efi_enter_virtual_mode() and called earlier before acpi_load_tables()
> >>>> in acpi_early_init().
> >>>>
> >>>> This will allow us to use UEFI memory map in acpi_os_ioremap() to create
> >>>> mappings of ACPI tables using memory attributes described in UEFI memory
> >>>> map.
>
> >>> Hmm, this is ugly as hell. Is there nothing else we can piggy-back off?
> >>> It's also fairly jarring that, on x86, efi_enter_virtual_mode() is called
> >>> a few lines later, *after* acpi_early_init() has been called.
>
> >> Currently, there is a gap where we have already torn down the early
> >> mapping and haven't created the definitive mapping of the UEFI memory
> >> map. There are other reasons why this is an issue, and I recently
> >> proposed [0] myself to address one of them
>
> >> Akashi-san, could you please confirm whether the patch below would be
> >> sufficient for you? Apologies for going back and forth on this, but I
> >> agree with Will that we should try to avoid warts like the one above
> >> in generic code.
> >>
> >> [0] https://marc.info/?l=linux-efi&m=152930773507524&w=2
> >
> > I think that this patch will also work.
> > Please drop my patch#2 and #3 if you want to pick up my patchset, Will.
>
> Patch 2 is what changes arm_enable_runtime_services() to map the efi memory map
> before bailing out due to efi=noruntime.
>
> Without it, 'efi=noruntime' means no-acpi-tables.
So it sounds like we want patch 2. Akashi, given that this series is only
four patches, please can you send out a v3 with the stuff that should be
reviewed and merged? Otherwise, there's a real risk we end up with breakage
that goes unnoticed initially.
Thanks,
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-05 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-19 6:44 [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: kexec, kdump: fix boot failures on acpi-only system AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: kexec,kdump: " AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: kexec, kdump: " AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] arm64: export memblock_reserve()d regions via /proc/iomem AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 13:37 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-06-19 13:37 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-06-19 13:37 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-06-19 15:00 ` James Morse
2018-06-19 15:00 ` James Morse
2018-06-19 15:00 ` James Morse
2018-06-19 15:22 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-06-19 15:22 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-06-19 15:22 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-07-03 6:47 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-03 6:47 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-03 6:47 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-03 12:14 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-07-03 12:14 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-07-03 12:14 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-07-03 16:12 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-07-03 16:12 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-07-03 16:12 ` Dave Kleikamp
2018-07-05 22:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-06-19 6:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] efi/arm: map UEFI memory map even w/o runtime services enabled AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-28 17:29 ` James Morse
2018-06-28 17:29 ` James Morse
2018-06-28 17:29 ` James Morse
2018-07-05 22:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-06-19 6:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] efi/arm: map UEFI memory map earlier on boot AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-04 17:06 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-04 17:06 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-04 17:06 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-04 18:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-04 18:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-04 18:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 9:43 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-05 9:43 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-05 9:43 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-05 11:02 ` James Morse
2018-07-05 11:02 ` James Morse
2018-07-05 11:02 ` James Morse
2018-07-05 16:48 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2018-07-05 16:48 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-05 16:48 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-05 22:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-06 0:42 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-06 0:42 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-06 0:42 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-06 1:33 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-06 1:33 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-06 1:33 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-07-06 13:37 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-06 13:37 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-06 13:37 ` Will Deacon
2018-06-19 6:44 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: acpi: fix alignment fault in accessing ACPI AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-19 6:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2018-06-28 17:28 ` James Morse
2018-06-28 17:28 ` James Morse
2018-06-28 17:28 ` James Morse
2018-07-05 22:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-07-05 22:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=20180705164824.GA7445@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=al.stone@linaro.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bhsharma@redhat.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=graeme.gregory@linaro.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=tbaicar@codeaurora.org \
/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.