From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dyoung@redhat.com (Dave Young) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 14:19:45 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] UEFI arm64: add noefi boot param In-Reply-To: <20140806141814.GD15082@console-pimps.org> References: <20140806083825.GA31711@dhcp-16-198.nay.redhat.com> <20140806130623.GI4179@bivouac.eciton.net> <20140806132021.GB15082@console-pimps.org> <20140806132941.GJ4179@bivouac.eciton.net> <20140806140155.GC15082@console-pimps.org> <20140806141814.GD15082@console-pimps.org> Message-ID: <20140807061945.GE20295@darkstar.nay.redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 08/06/14 at 03:18pm, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Wed, 06 Aug, at 04:10:45PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > > Shouldn't we clear the bit here if we failed to enable runtime > > services for some reason? Other code may test the bit assuming that it > > signifies that runtime services have been enabled successfully, while > > this patch changes it to mean that we /intended/ to enable them, which > > is not quite the same thing. > > Yep, good catch. We need to do something similar for efi_runtime_init() > on x86 too. The current efi_runtime_init() enables the bit after getting the efi callback phyaddr of SetVirtualAddressMap. Thinking more about it, since SetVirtualAddressMap() could fail somehow it seems better to set EFI_RUNTIME_SERIVCES bit only when enter virtual mode return EFI_SUCCESS. Does it make sense to you, Matt? Thanks Dave