public inbox for linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@google.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	 Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	"Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@kernel.org>,
	 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 18/19] x86/efi: Do not abuse RUNTIME bit to mark boot regions as reserved
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 10:05:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260319090529.1091660-39-ardb+git@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260319090529.1091660-21-ardb+git@google.com>

From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>

efi_reserve_boot_regions() marks all EFI boot services memory regions as
memblock_reserve()'d temporarily, so that they can be mapped in the EFI
page tables during the call to the SetVirtualAddressMap() runtime
service.

This means it has to take care to distinguish between regions that are
entirely unused from regions that are already covered by some prior
reservations, either by the kernel itself via memblock, or via the
firmware or bootloader via the E820 map.

For this reason, it only memblock_reserve()'s boot services regions that
are not covered by any prior memblock reservation. Otherwise, it will
set the EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME flag for the region, which indicates to the
freeing code that runs later that the region must remain reserved.

It also sets the EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME flag for the region if it covers any
E820 region that is not E820_RAM, so that -again- the entire region
remains reserved indefinitely.

This is inefficient, and abusing the EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME flag for this is
not great either. It would be better to respect the actual memblock or
E820 reservations instead, which is feasible now that the freeing code
takes the MEMBLOCK_RSRV_KERN flag into account.

So drop the EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME hack, and instead, respect existing
memblock reservations by upgrading them to MEMBLOCK_RSRV_KERN
reservations. Take E820 reservations into account by cross-referencing
them with the EFI and memblock reservations when actually returning the
pages back to the page allocator.

Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
---
 arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c | 29 ++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
index bc9dfe7925aa..8f2dc477eee0 100644
--- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
+++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c
@@ -298,26 +298,13 @@ void __init efi_reserve_boot_services(void)
 		 */
 		if (!already_reserved) {
 			memblock_reserve(start, size);
-
+		} else {
 			/*
-			 * If we are the first to reserve the region, no
-			 * one else cares about it. We own it and can
-			 * free it later.
+			 * Mark existing reservations as MEMBLOCK_RSRV_KERN so
+			 * they will be respected by efi_free_boot_services().
 			 */
-			if (can_free_region(start, size))
-				continue;
+			memblock_reserved_mark_kern(start, size);
 		}
-
-		/*
-		 * We don't own the region. We must not free it.
-		 *
-		 * Setting this bit for a boot services region really
-		 * doesn't make sense as far as the firmware is
-		 * concerned, but it does provide us with a way to tag
-		 * those regions that must not be paired with
-		 * memblock_free_late().
-		 */
-		md->attribute |= EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME;
 	}
 }
 
@@ -392,6 +379,9 @@ efi_free_unreserved_subregions(u64 range_start, u64 range_end)
 		if (start >= end)
 			continue;
 
+		if (!can_free_region(start, end - start))
+			continue;
+
 		free_reserved_area(phys_to_virt(start),
 				   phys_to_virt(end), -1, NULL);
 		freed += (end - start);
@@ -428,9 +418,8 @@ static int __init efi_free_boot_services(void)
 		if (md_start >= md_end)
 			continue;
 
-		if (!(md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME) &&
-		    (md->type == EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE ||
-		     md->type == EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA)) {
+		if (md->type == EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE ||
+		    md->type == EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA) {
 			u64 f = efi_free_unreserved_subregions(md_start, md_end);
 
 			/*
-- 
2.53.0.851.ga537e3e6e9-goog


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-03-19  9:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-19  9:05 [PATCH v2 00/19] efi/x86: Avoid the need to mangle the EFI memory map Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 01/19] memblock: Permit existing reserved regions to be marked RSRV_KERN Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 02/19] efi: Tag memblock reservations of boot services regions as RSRV_KERN Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 03/19] x86/efi: Unmap kernel-reserved boot regions from EFI page tables Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 04/19] x86/efi: Drop EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME check from __ioremap_check_other() Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 05/19] x86/efi: Omit RSRV_KERN memblock reservations when freeing boot regions Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 06/19] x86/efi: Defer sub-1M check from unmap to free stage Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 07/19] x86/efi: Simplify real mode trampoline allocation quirk Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 08/19] x86/efi: Omit redundant kernel image overlap check Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 09/19] x86/efi: Drop redundant EFI_PARAVIRT check Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 10/19] x86/efi: Do not rely on EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME bit and avoid entry splitting Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 11/19] efi: Use nr_map not map_end to find the last valid memory map entry Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 12/19] x86/efi: Only merge EFI memory map entries on 32-bit systems Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 13/19] x86/efi: Clean the memory map using iterator and filter API Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 14/19] x86/efi: Update the runtime map in place Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 15/19] x86/efi: Use iterator API when mapping EFI regions for runtime Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 16/19] x86/efi: Reuse memory map instead of reallocating it Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 17/19] x86/efi: Defer compaction of the EFI memory map Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-19  9:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
2026-03-19  9:05 ` [PATCH v2 19/19] x86/efi: Free unused tail " Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-24  9:50 ` [PATCH v2 00/19] efi/x86: Avoid the need to mangle " Ard Biesheuvel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260319090529.1091660-39-ardb+git@google.com \
    --to=ardb+git@google.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox