On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:49:35AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 25/01/18 11:37, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:04:54AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > >> Add acpi_arch_get_root_pointer() for Xen PVH guests to communicate > >> the address of the RSDP table given to the kernel via Xen start info. > >> > >> This makes the kernel boot again in PVH mode after on recent Xen the > >> RSDP was moved to higher addresses. So up to that change it was pure > >> luck that the legacy method to locate the RSDP was working when > >> running as PVH mode. > >> > >> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 4.11 > >> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pvh.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- > >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pvh.c b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pvh.c > >> index 436c4f003e17..9a5c3a7fe673 100644 > >> --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pvh.c > >> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pvh.c > >> @@ -16,15 +16,24 @@ > >> /* > >> * PVH variables. > >> * > >> - * xen_pvh and pvh_bootparams need to live in data segment since they > >> - * are used after startup_{32|64}, which clear .bss, are invoked. > >> + * xen_pvh, pvh_bootparams and pvh_start_info need to live in data segment > >> + * since they are used after startup_{32|64}, which clear .bss, are invoked. > >> */ > >> bool xen_pvh __attribute__((section(".data"))) = 0; > >> struct boot_params pvh_bootparams __attribute__((section(".data"))); > >> +struct hvm_start_info pvh_start_info __attribute__((section(".data"))); > >> > >> -struct hvm_start_info pvh_start_info; > >> unsigned int pvh_start_info_sz = sizeof(pvh_start_info); > >> > >> +acpi_physical_address acpi_arch_get_root_pointer(void) > >> +{ > >> + if (xen_pvh) > >> + return pvh_start_info.rsdp_paddr; > >> + > >> + return 0; > >> +} > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_arch_get_root_pointer); > > > > Why does this have to be an exported symbol? Does this code get built > > as a module and will the linker somehow go and rewrite the previous call > > places with this one if it gets loaded? > > With being called by drivers/acpi/... I just wanted to make sure it is > working properly even in case the acpi code is built as a module. I didn't think the core ACPI code can be built as a module, have you tried that? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html