From: "Gupta, Pankaj" <pankaj.gupta@amd.com>
To: Gerd Hoffman <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: "Dionna Glaze" <dionnaglaze@google.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Xu@google.com,
"Min M" <min.m.xu@intel.com>, "Xiaoyao Li" <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
"Thomas Lendacky" <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
"Eduardo Habkost" <eduardo@habkost.net>,
"Marcel Apfelbaum" <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>,
"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>,
"Yanan Wang" <wangyanan55@huawei.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Richard Henderson" <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hw/i386: Add unaccepted memory configuration
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 10:28:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bdc579f3-3acb-cc22-65eb-b94e7590e376@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220622080407.xnohl6t276cljoik@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
Hi Gerd,
> Hi,
>
>> AFAIU 'true' is the behavior you are proposing with your EFI changes?
>> Saying that what's the difference between 'false' & 'default' wrt EFI
>> firmware? Just wondering do we need default?
>
> true/false will force the one or the other no matter what.
>
> 'default' allows the firmware to choose depending on various factors,
> for example have cc-specific build variants have a different default
> behavior than the generic builds.
>
> It also keeps the door open to change default behavior in the future.
> One reasonable approach would be to start with firmware accepting all
> memory by default, wait until support for unaccepted memory has found
> its way into linux distro kernels, then flip the default to pass
> unaccepted memory to the linux kernel.
>
> In case the uefi boot service spec gets updated to allow negotiating
> unaccepted memory support automatically this can be used easily by
> making that the firmware's default behavior.
Fair. Also, it would be interesting to see the right future combination
of {un/a}cceptable boot vs runtime aceptable memory and also support in
uefi specs.
o.k to keep placeholder for now but I still see, might have to keep the
interface extensible, maybe something like bit level negotiations
than true/false/default etc. But for now I don't have any strong opinion
or ideas and have to catch up from uefi side.
Thank you for explaining.
Best regards,
Pankaj
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-22 8:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-20 22:33 [PATCH] hw/i386: Add unaccepted memory configuration Dionna Glaze
2022-06-21 5:37 ` Gerd Hoffman
2022-06-21 6:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2022-06-21 10:34 ` Gupta, Pankaj
2022-06-22 8:04 ` Gerd Hoffman
2022-06-22 8:28 ` Gupta, Pankaj [this message]
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=bdc579f3-3acb-cc22-65eb-b94e7590e376@amd.com \
--to=pankaj.gupta@amd.com \
--cc=Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=Xu@google.com \
--cc=dionnaglaze@google.com \
--cc=eduardo@habkost.net \
--cc=f4bug@amsat.org \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
--cc=min.m.xu@intel.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=wangyanan55@huawei.com \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).