From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: unusual uefi call/mapping problem Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:23:29 +0100 Message-ID: <20130430162329.GA7962@srcf.ucam.org> References: <516DC325.6090604@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130430125225.GA4197@srcf.ucam.org> <517FE891.9070103@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <517FE891.9070103-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Joel Schopp Cc: linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Leonidas da Silva Barbosa List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:51:45AM -0500, Joel Schopp wrote: > On 04/30/2013 07:52 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 04:31:17PM -0500, Joel Schopp wrote: > >>I'm working on the Linux kernel implementation of an draft standard > >>that has a uefi component. The interesting part is that the uefi > >>component isn't in the uefi runtime table, but instead has a > >>physical address stored an ACPI table. Other than not being in the > >>runtime table it behaves exactly like the other runtime services. > > > >Sigh. Is the spec final yet? Doing this in ACPI is inconvenient - ACPI > >isn't available at the stage where we do early UEFI setup, so it would > >have been much easier if this had been a UEFI table rather than an ACPI > >one. > > The spec appears to currently be in purgatory, finished but not > published. Do you happen to know offhand what spec defines the UEFI > runtime services table? That's in the UEFI spec, but it wouldn't be appropriate to put it there. Instead, you can add another UEFI table with a different UUID and have a pointer to that from the ConfigurationTables pointer in the UEFI system table. > > > >>2) Various methods to map in the physical address into virtual > >>address space and then call the virtual address. All of these have > >>failed. > > Turns out there was a bug in the UEFI implementation, I'm pretty > sure we have a way to map it in and call it now. Cool. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org