public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>,
	mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, yhlu.kernel@gmail.com,
	steiner@sgi.com, travis@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	andi@firstfloor.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] x86 boot: allow overlapping ebda and efi memmap	memory ranges
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:48:38 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48568B56.7060307@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1213606435.12968.14.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>

Huang, Ying wrote:
>>> Or do not reserve EBDA on EFI system.
>> I suppose.  This would have been a bigger change than I could
>> suggest.  For all I know, there are existing systems using EBDA
>> and EFI together.  Would this change break them?
>>
>> If you have good reason to know that's essentially impossible then
>> I have no objections, so far as my needs go, to not reserving EBDA
>> on EFI systems.
> 
> I think if EBDA area is used in EFI system, it should be reserved in EFI
> memory map.

Realistically, we need the infrastructure to be able to make paranoia 
reservations, and you need to be able to deal with later finding they 
are actually in use.  That's part of why we *make* paranoia 
reservations.  It's not acceptable to say "oh, it's EFI, we don't need 
it" -- that's equivalent to saying "oh, EFI firmware won't have any 
bugs."  Although I know there are plenty of EFI fanboys who seem to have 
that idea, I consider it about as likely as the tooth fairy.

	-hpa

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-06-16 15:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-16  6:29 [PATCH 1/8] x86 boot: x86_64 build reserve_bootmem_generic fix Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:29 ` [PATCH 2/8] x86 boot: e820 code indentation fix Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:29 ` [PATCH 3/8] x86 boot: x86_64 efi compiler warning fix Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:30 ` [PATCH 4/8] x86 boot: allow overlapping ebda and efi memmap memory ranges Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:54   ` Yinghai Lu
2008-06-16  7:32     ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  7:34       ` Yinghai Lu
2008-06-16  8:31         ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  7:07   ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-16  8:24     ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  8:53       ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-16  9:09         ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  9:14           ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-16 15:48         ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2008-06-16 16:38           ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16 17:05             ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-06-16 17:37               ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16 17:41                 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-06-16 18:09                   ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16 18:18                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-06-16 18:53                       ` Alan Cox
2008-06-16 19:58                         ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-06-16 17:46                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-06-16 18:05                   ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-17  1:00                     ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-16  6:30 ` [PATCH 5/8] x86 boot: remap efi systab runtime from phys to virt Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  7:02   ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-16  8:06     ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  8:27       ` Huang, Ying
2008-06-16  8:26         ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:30 ` [PATCH 6/8] x86 boot: virtualize the efi runtime function callback addresses Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:30 ` [PATCH 7/8] x86 boot: show pfn addresses in hex not decimal in some kernel info printks Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  7:05   ` Yinghai Lu
2008-06-16  8:09     ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:30 ` [PATCH 8/8] x86 boot: more consistently use type int for node ids Paul Jackson
2008-06-16  6:50 ` [PATCH 1/8] x86 boot: x86_64 build reserve_bootmem_generic fix Yinghai Lu
2008-06-16  8:40   ` Paul Jackson

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=48568B56.7060307@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=pj@sgi.com \
    --cc=steiner@sgi.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.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