From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760991AbYFMA5S (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:57:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757216AbYFMA5E (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:57:04 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:3120 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755615AbYFMA5D (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:57:03 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,634,1204531200"; d="scan'208";a="339770597" Subject: Re: Confusions with reserve_early, reserve_bootmem, e820, efi, ... on x86_64 From: "Huang, Ying" To: Paul Jackson Cc: Yinghai Lu , Ingo Molnar , Bernhard Walle , Johannes Weiner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jack Steiner In-Reply-To: <20080612050609.88a8cf7f.pj@sgi.com> References: <20080612050609.88a8cf7f.pj@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 08:59:39 +0800 Message-Id: <1213318779.20431.3.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jun 2008 00:56:59.0335 (UTC) FILETIME=[624ADD70:01C8CCF0] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 05:06 -0500, Paul Jackson wrote: > Bernhard, Johannes, Huang, and Yinghai: > > I am running into some complications with reserve_bootmem vs > reserve_early, and a reserve_early of "EFI memmap" in the > efi_reserve_early() routine conflicting with reserve_early of > "BIOS reserved" in reserve_ebda_region(). > > This is on x86_64 arch, using Ingo's x86-latest, with possibly > still buggy EFI firmware in a lab system I'm helping to develop. > > I have three concerns: > > 1) The find_overlapped_early() check called from reserve_early is > failing on my lab system , causing panic, when it tries to > register "EFI memmap" at addresses <0xe0660, 0xe0778> that > overlaps with the "BIOS reserved" early reserve at addresses > <0x9f000, 0x100000> I think this can be resolved by avoiding memory area <0x9f000, 0x100000> when allocating memory for EFI memory map in boot-loader. Best Regards, Huang Ying