public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
	Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
	James Bottomley <JBottomley@odin.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
	"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/efi: Map EFI memmap entries in-order at runtime
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 14:16:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150908131622.GA2854@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu-AQdgJNOtrgtEtqxsaSC_L=EANpC3pT8b6X2jmZ5qO_Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 04 Sep, at 08:53:36PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 4 September 2015 at 20:23, Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, 04 Sep, at 03:24:21PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>
> >> Since the UEFI spec does not mandate an enumeration order for
> >> GetMemoryMap(), it seems to me that you still need to sort its output
> >> before laying out the VA space. Since you need to sort it anyway, why
> >> not simply sort it in reverse order and keep all the original code?
> >> Considering that this is meant for stable, that would keep the delta
> >> *much* smaller.
> >
> > Hmm... that'd be a neat trick and while it would save on the diff
> > size, I don't think it would be smaller in terms of change complexity.
> >
> > EDK2 sorts the memory map when EFI_PROPERTIES_TABLE is enabled, so we
> > can be reasonably sure the entry order returned by GetMemoryMap() is
> > compatible with the split regions, even if it's not mandated by the
> > spec.
> >
> 
> EDK2 does sort it, but the spec does not mandate it so another
> implementation may do something different entirely.
 
Yeah, we should get that requirement added to the spec.

> > For the non-EFI_PROPERTIES_TABLE case, things have been working fine
> > without the sorting, so I'm reluctant to introduce it now (it's also
> > much less of an issue there).
> >
> 
> I see. I do wonder, since the VA mapping preserves the modulo 2 MB
> alignment of each region, aren't you using much more VA space when
> mapping in reverse order as you are doing now?

It doesn't enforce a 2MB alignment for every entry, just those that
are actually 2MB aligned. This should be exactly what was done in the
previous version of the code. Do you see a bug?

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-09-08 13:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-04 13:14 [PATCH] x86/efi: Map EFI memmap entries in-order at runtime Matt Fleming
2015-09-04 13:24 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-04 18:23   ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-04 18:53     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-06 14:06       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-08 13:16       ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2015-09-08 13:21         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-08 20:37           ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-09  7:37             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-09  9:58               ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-09  9:59                 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-07  4:07 ` joeyli
2015-09-08 20:41   ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-09  0:33     ` joeyli
2015-09-09 11:21       ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-10  3:38         ` joeyli
2015-09-16 10:08         ` Borislav Petkov
2015-09-16 11:25           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-16 13:28             ` Borislav Petkov
2015-09-16 13:38               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-17  8:05                 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-09-16 13:37             ` James Bottomley
2015-09-16 14:07               ` 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=20150908131622.GA2854@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=JBottomley@odin.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=bp@suse.de \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=leif.lindholm@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
    --cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
    --cc=pjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.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