From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, andi@firstfloor.org,
mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yhlu.kernel@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 boot: Pass E820 memory map entries more than 128 via linked list of setup data
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:14:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1214212441.27182.4.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080623034728.250c6fd1.pj@sgi.com>
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 03:47 -0500, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Huang Ying wrote:
> > So, I think it is better to remove "EFI memmap based code".
>
> You give good reasons for -adding- E820 EXT code. Fine.
>
> You give no reason for -removing- the EFI memmap based code,
> except the implicit (unstated) reason that we should only
> support a single mechanism.
>
> However the kernel routinely supports a variety of mechanisms
> for various BIOS firmware, as it should.
>
> Internally, within the kernel, when it is entirely within the
> kernels control and when there is no externally visible kernel
> interface affected, we routinely strive to minimize redundant
> mechanisms, as we should.
>
> But externally, such as in supporting various boot firmware
> protocols, we routinely support multiple useful interfaces.
>
> If that EFI memmap based code for > 128 nodes is causing you
> no problem, then please leave it be. It is providing us good
> benefit.
Please fix the following issue, if it is agreed to keep this redundant
code in kernel:
4. Current EFI memmap based code does not work properly in all
situation, for example it can not works with kernel parameter:
"memmap=exactmap, memmap=<xxx>, ...", "mem=<xxx>" or "noefi".
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-23 9:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-11 3:33 [PATCH] x86 boot: Pass E820 memory map entries more than 128 via linked list of setup data Huang, Ying
2008-06-18 11:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-23 5:54 ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-23 6:53 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-23 7:21 ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-23 8:47 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-23 9:14 ` Huang, Ying [this message]
2008-06-23 9:48 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-24 1:09 ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-24 5:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-06-24 7:03 ` Huang, Ying
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=1214212441.27182.4.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com \
--to=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
/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