Re: [PATCH v5 12/22] arm/acpi: Prepare EFI memory descriptor for Dom0

[Shannon Zhao <zhaoshenglong@huawei.com>]

On 2016/3/4 19:13, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>> > From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org>
>> > 
>> > Create a few EFI memory descriptors to tell Dom0 the RAM region
>> > information, ACPI table regions and EFI tables reserved resions.
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Parth Dixit <parth.dixit@linaro.org>
>> > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org>
>> > ---
>> > v5: move to efi-dom0.c
>> > ---
>> >  xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c |  2 ++
>> >  xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-dom0.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  xen/include/asm-arm/setup.h |  5 +++++
>> >  3 files changed, 54 insertions(+)
>> > 
>> > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>> > index 613551c..008fc76 100644
>> > --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>> > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>> > @@ -1688,6 +1688,8 @@ static int prepare_acpi(struct domain *d, struct kernel_info *kinfo)
>> >      acpi_map_other_tables(d);
>> >      acpi_create_efi_system_table(d->arch.efi_acpi_gpa, d->arch.efi_acpi_table,
>> >                                   tbl_add);
>> > +    acpi_create_efi_mmap_table(d->arch.efi_acpi_gpa, d->arch.efi_acpi_len,
>> > +                               d->arch.efi_acpi_table, &kinfo->mem, tbl_add);
>> >  
>> >      return 0;
>> >  }
>> > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-dom0.c b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-dom0.c
>> > index 36a1283..0ff6309 100644
>> > --- a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-dom0.c
>> > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-dom0.c
>> > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>> >   */
>> >  
>> >  #include "efi.h"
>> > +#include <xen/pfn.h>
>> >  #include <asm/setup.h>
>> >  #include <asm/acpi.h>
>> >  
>> > @@ -90,3 +91,49 @@ void __init acpi_create_efi_system_table(paddr_t paddr, void *efi_acpi_table,
>> >      tbl_add[TBL_EFIT].start = table_addr;
>> >      tbl_add[TBL_EFIT].size = table_size;
>> >  }
>> > +
>> > +void __init acpi_create_efi_mmap_table(paddr_t paddr, paddr_t size,
>> > +                                       void *efi_acpi_table,
>> > +                                       const struct meminfo *mem,
>> > +                                       struct membank tbl_add[])
>> > +{
>> > +    EFI_MEMORY_DESCRIPTOR *memory_map;
>> > +    struct meminfo *acpi_mem;
>> > +    int acpi_mem_nr_banks = 0;
>> > +    unsigned int i, offset;
>> > +    u8 *base_ptr;
>> > +
>> > +    base_ptr = efi_acpi_table + acpi_get_table_offset(tbl_add, TBL_MMAP);
>> > +    memory_map = (EFI_MEMORY_DESCRIPTOR *)(base_ptr);
>> > +
>> > +    offset = 0;
>> > +    for( i = 0; i < mem->nr_banks; i++, offset++ )
>> > +    {
>> > +        memory_map[offset].Type = EfiConventionalMemory;
>> > +        memory_map[offset].PhysicalStart = mem->bank[i].start;
>> > +        memory_map[offset].NumberOfPages = PFN_UP(mem->bank[i].size);
>> > +        memory_map[offset].Attribute = EFI_MEMORY_WB;
>> > +    }
>> > +
>> > +    if ( !acpi_disabled )
>> > +    {
> Isn't this check redundant, givem that the function is name is
> acpi_create_efi_mmap_table and is called by prepare_acpi?
> 
Will remove it.

Thanks,
-- 
Shannon


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel