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 S1752191AbcELCWd (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 11 May 2016 22:22:33 -0400
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.66]:11005 "EHLO
	szxga03-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751552AbcELCWb (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 11 May 2016 22:22:31 -0400
Message-ID: <5733E8CF.3070004@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 10:22:07 +0800
From: Shannon Zhao <zhaoshenglong@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
        Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org>
CC: <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        <will.deacon@arm.com>, <sstabellini@kernel.org>, <stefano@aporeto.com>,
        <julien.grall@arm.com>, <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <peter.huangpeng@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Xen: EFI: Parse DT parameters for Xen specific UEFI
References: <1462523526-3172-1-git-send-email-zhaoshenglong@huawei.com> <20160511122730.GU2839@codeblueprint.co.uk> <57333533.2030206@linaro.org> <20160511232444.GY2839@codeblueprint.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20160511232444.GY2839@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.177.16.142]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0),
	refid=str=0001.0A020201.5733E8DB.007B,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0,
	ip=0.0.0.0,
	so=2013-05-26 15:14:31,
	dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: f367542fed3fb4dd21527b68904e63f2
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org



On 2016/5/12 7:24, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 11 May, at 09:35:47PM, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>>> > > 
>>> > > Also, why do you need to setup efi.runtime_version here? Isn't that
>>> > > done inside uefi_init()?
>>> > > 
>> > I don't see any codes which setup efi.runtime_version in uefi_init().
>  
> Look in the EFI tree,
> 
>   https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/efi.git/tree/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-init.c?h=next#n120
> 
Ah, there are some patches in EFI tree introducing this change, but they
are not in kernel matser but I didn't notice this, sorry.

>>> > > Here is how I would have expected this patch to look:
>>> > > 
>>> > >   - Add FDT code to find hypervisor EFI params
>>> > > 
>>> > >   - Force enable EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES for Xen and call
>>> > >     xen_efi_runtime_setup() inside xen_guest_init()
>>> > > 
>>> > >   - Change arm_enable_runtime_services() to handle the case where
>>> > >     EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES is already set
>>> > > 
>>> > > Am I misunderstanding some ordering issues?
>> > 
>> > Since xen_guest_init() and arm_enable_runtime_services() are both
>> > early_initcall and the calling order is random I think.
> Urgh, right, I missed that.
> 
>> > And when we call xen_efi_runtime_setup() and setup
>> > efi.runtime_version in xen_guest_init(), the efi.systab might be
>> > NULL. So it needs to map the systanle explicitly before we use
>> > efi.systab.
> Could you explain why you need to copy efi.runtime_version instead of
> letting the existing code in uefi_init() set it up?
> 
> Also, efi.systab isn't used by xen_efi_runtime_setup() as far I can
> see, not sure why you need that either?
As said above, I will rebase this patch on top of the EFI next branch.

Thanks,
-- 
Shannon