From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S968292AbdAEHmz (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 5 Jan 2017 02:42:55 -0500
Received: from mail-wj0-f194.google.com ([209.85.210.194]:36034 "EHLO
        mail-wj0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S967180AbdAEHmr (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 5 Jan 2017 02:42:47 -0500
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 08:42:21 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mika =?iso-8859-1?Q?Penttil=E4?= <mika.penttila@nextfour.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/efi: don't allocate memmap through memblock
 after mm_init()
Message-ID: <20170105074221.GA1777@gmail.com>
References: <20161222102340.2689-1-nicstange@gmail.com>
 <20161223145206.GC16838@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <878tr6jqoa.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <878tr6jqoa.fsf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com> wrote:

> Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, 22 Dec, at 11:23:39AM, Nicolai Stange wrote:
> >> So, after memblock is gone, allocations should be done through the "normal"
> >> page allocator. Introduce a helper, efi_memmap_alloc() for this. Use
> >> it from efi_arch_mem_reserve() and from efi_free_boot_services() as well.
> >> 
> >> Fixes: 4bc9f92e64c8 ("x86/efi-bgrt: Use efi_mem_reserve() to avoid copying image data")
> >> Signed-off-by: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
> 
> > Could you also modify efi_fake_memmap() to use your new
> > efi_memmap_alloc() function for consistency
> 
> Sure.
> 
> I'm planning to submit another set of patches addressing the (bounded)
> memmap leaking in anything calling efi_memmap_unmap() though. In the
> course of doing so, the memmap allocation sites will get touched anyway:
> I'll have to store some information about how the memmap's memory has
> been obtained.

Will that patch be intrusive?

If yes then we'll need to keep this a separate urgent patch to fix the v4.9 
regression that Dan Williams reported. I can apply the fix to efi/urgent and get 
it to Linus straight away if you guys agree.

Thanks,

	Ingo