From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Fleming Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 10/14] efi: only print saved efi runtime maps instead of all memmap ranges for kexec Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:41:44 +0000 Message-ID: <20131219164144.GG3145@console-pimps.org> References: <1387186235-15972-1-git-send-email-dyoung@redhat.com> <1387186235-15972-11-git-send-email-dyoung@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1387186235-15972-11-git-send-email-dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Dave Young Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org, hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, James.Bottomley-d9PhHud1JfjCXq6kfMZ53/egYHeGw8Jk@public.gmane.org, vgoyal-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, horms-/R6kz+dDXgpPR4JQBCEnsQ@public.gmane.org, kexec-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, bp-Gina5bIWoIWzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org, greg-U8xfFu+wG4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, toshi.kani-VXdhtT5mjnY@public.gmane.org, akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, msalter-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, leif.lindholm-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 16 Dec, at 05:30:31PM, Dave Young wrote: > For kexec/kdump kernel efi runtime mappings are saved, printing original whole > memmap ranges does not make sense anymore. So introduce a new function to only > print runtime maps in case kexec/kdump kernel is used. > > changelog: > Matt: use efi_setup instead of esdata > share function print_efi_memmap for both normal and kexec boot. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Young > --- > arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) Thinking about this a bit more, I'm not at all sure why this patch exists. Why do we not want to print the entire memory map range like we did in the first kernel? The e820 map is printed exactly like it was in the first kernel, why should the EFI memmap be special? -- Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center