From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 09:39:44 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64/efi: efistub: don't abort if base of DRAM is occupied In-Reply-To: <540F577A.4040709@redhat.com> References: <1406717944-24725-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <1406717944-24725-4-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20140814113204.GE24018@leverpostej> <20140820171057.GG29733@console-pimps.org> <20140820173528.GH21734@leverpostej> <540F577A.4040709@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20140910083944.GA28488@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Jon Masters wrote: > On 08/20/2014 01:35 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 06:10:57PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > >> On Thu, 14 Aug, at 12:32:05PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:59:04AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >>>> If we cannot relocate the kernel Image to its preferred offset of base of DRAM > >>>> plus TEXT_OFFSET, instead relocate it to the lowest available 2 MB boundary plus > >>>> TEXT_OFFSET. We may lose a bit of memory at the low end, but we can still > >>>> proceed normally otherwise. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel > >>>> Acked-by: Mark Salter > >>> > >>> Acked-by: Mark Rutland > >> > >> Ard, who's picking this up? > > > > Will's already taken this into arm64/devel [1,2] with the intention of > > waiting for v3.18 [3]. Per Leif's comment [4] that might have to be > > bumped. > > So what's the plan with this series? Waiting for 3.18? The problem is > that this patch series needs to be pulled for any platform with an EFI > firmware located at DRAM base (e.g. AMD Seattle) as was noted before. Yes, it's queued for 3.18 and should be in linux-next too. This isn't a regression, so you'll just have to sit tight. Will