From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752752Ab1KGUpy (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:45:54 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:45273 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751600Ab1KGUpx (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:45:53 -0500 Message-ID: <4EB8436B.20603@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 12:45:31 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Garrett CC: Matt Fleming , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Zhang Rui , Huang Ying , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86, efi: Calling __pa() with an ioremap'd address is invalid References: <1320680088-2584-1-git-send-email-matt@console-pimps.org> <20111107202324.GA27515@srcf.ucam.org> <4EB8413D.6030500@zytor.com> <20111107203752.GA27875@srcf.ucam.org> In-Reply-To: <20111107203752.GA27875@srcf.ucam.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/07/2011 12:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 12:36:13PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >> Yes, I think it makes a lot of sense. If we need to introduce new >> meta-types to deal with the fact that there are EFI types that don't map >> to E820, then so be it... and this is *exactly* why we want the EFI >> setup stub to be part of the kernel image and not off in a separate >> bootloader, requiring a stable interface... > > I don't disagree, it's just going to be an absolute pain to manage that > in a secure boot world. Could you clarify, please? > Looking at the code, we actually already seem to > have decided to start just making up E820 types, so maybe we should just > do that... That's what I just said, no? I think we use negative numbers for those. -hpa