From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Cliff Wickman <cpw@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
pj@sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: vendor reserved memory type
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:01:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A32980A.2020209@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090612133918.GA17557@sgi.com>
Yinghai, Huang, Paul: looks good to you [see patch at end]? Anyone else
we should have look at this?
-hpa
Cliff Wickman wrote:
>> There is no difference between that and E820_RESERVED, so there is no
>> reason to distinguish them. The semantics are exactly the same.
>
> I thought a new type would be clearer, but if it would break an e820
> standard I withdraw the idea. All is good as long as the memory gets reserved.
We *could* add private types with negative numbers if we had to, but
that means adding some infrastructure, and this doesn't seem justified
for this case. There is also a cost involved, since different types
can't be range-merged.
>>
>> The real problem is that this condition is too lenient:
>>
>> if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
>> e820_type = E820_RAM;
>> else
>> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
>>
>> It really should be something like:
>>
>> switch (md->type) {
>> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
>> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
>> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
>> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
>> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
>> if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
>> e820_type = E820_RAM;
>> else
>> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
>> break;
>> case EFI_ACPI_RECLAIM_MEMORY:
>> e820_type = E820_ACPI;
>> break;
>> case EFI_ACPI_MEMORY_NVS:
>> e820_type = E820_NVS;
>> break;
>> case EFI_UNUSABLE_MEMORY:
>> e820_type = E820_UNUSUABLE;
>> break;
>> default:
>> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
>> break;
>> }
>
> Okay. I buy that as more straightforward.
>
>> Personally, it's not clear to me if this should do add any non-memory
>> ranges, as the boot loader should have done that, but I guess in this
>> particular case we have already horked out.
>>
>> Another problem is that the comment is wrong. sanitize_e820_map() will
>> coalesce adjacent entries, as it should.
>>
>> Finally, randomly definiting a standard value in E820 with new semantics
>> isn't going to fly; it's likely to conflict with official allocations.
>>
>> -hpa
>
> I propose to submit your code (basically) in the form of the below patch.
> It works for me. Does it look okay to you?
>
>
>
> Subject: [PATCH] x86: efi/e820 table merge fix
>
> This patch causes all the EFI_RESERVED_TYPE memory reservations to be recorded
> in the e820 table as type E820_RESERVED.
>
> Without this patch EFI_RESERVED_TYPE memory reservations may be
> marked usable in the e820 table. There may be a collision between
> kernel use and some reserver's use of this memory.
>
> (An example use of this functionality is the UV system, which
> will access extremely large areas of memory with a memory engine
> that allows a user to address beyond the processor's range. Such
> areas are reserved in the EFI table by the BIOS.
> Some loaders have a restricted number of entries possible in the e820 table,
> hence the need to record the reservations in the unrestricted EFI table.)
>
> The call to do_add_efi_memmap() is only made if "add_efi_memmap" is specified
> on the kernel command line.
>
> Diffed against 2.6.30-rc8
>
> Signed-off-by: Cliff Wickman <cpw@sgi.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/efi.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux/arch/x86/kernel/efi.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/arch/x86/kernel/efi.c
> +++ linux/arch/x86/kernel/efi.c
> @@ -240,10 +240,35 @@ static void __init do_add_efi_memmap(voi
> unsigned long long size = md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT;
> int e820_type;
>
> - if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
> - e820_type = E820_RAM;
> - else
> + switch (md->type) {
> + case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> + case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> + case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> + case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> + case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> + if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
> + e820_type = E820_RAM;
> + else
> + e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
> + break;
> + case EFI_ACPI_RECLAIM_MEMORY:
> + e820_type = E820_ACPI;
> + break;
> + case EFI_ACPI_MEMORY_NVS:
> + e820_type = E820_NVS;
> + break;
> + case EFI_UNUSABLE_MEMORY:
> + e820_type = E820_UNUSABLE;
> + break;
> + default:
> + /*
> + * EFI_RESERVED_TYPE EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE
> + * EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO
> + * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO_PORT_SPACE EFI_PAL_CODE
> + */
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
> + break;
> + }
> e820_add_region(start, size, e820_type);
> }
> sanitize_e820_map(e820.map, ARRAY_SIZE(e820.map), &e820.nr_map);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-12 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-11 14:27 [PATCH] x86: vendor reserved memory type Cliff Wickman
2009-06-11 15:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-06-12 13:39 ` Cliff Wickman
2009-06-12 18:01 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2009-06-12 18:17 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-12 18:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=4A32980A.2020209@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=cpw@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yinghai@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