On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:04:00PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:10:58AM +0100, Geoff Levand wrote: >> > > Change any reference of device tree '/memreserve/' entries in the arm64 >> > > booting.txt to refer to 'reserved-memory nodes'. Reserved-memory nodes >> > > are the preferred method of specifying reserved memory. >> > >> > Per my comments on patch 5, I don't think this change is sufficient. >> > >> > However, we should probably update the document to allow reserved-memory >> > nodes. >> > >> > On an unrelated note we probably need to work out how reserved-memory >> > interacts with the UEFI memory map -- unmappable regions shouldn't be >> > described by UEFI and I hope people don't use reserved-memory as a >> > workaround for broken UEFI tables. >> >> >> When booting with UEFI, the boot stub will clear out all memory nodes >> and (should) clear out reserved regions so that the kernel can use the >> UEFI memory map as authoritative. > > We clear memory nodes and memreserves currently. > > I was thinking about reserved-memory nodes (for CMA and such), which we > don't currently clear. We should either clear them, or make sure that they will coexist happily with the UEFI map. I can think of a few situations, like CMA, where still having the reserved-memory node would be a good idea. g.
