On Tue, 02 Jun, at 05:09:14PM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote: > Thank you for the feedback, Matt. > > Given that IA64 does not set EFI_MEMMAP, it appears to me there > are following options: > A. Keep status quota and copy x86's efi_mem_attributes() code > to arm64. Let's avoid this option. > B. In efi subsystem, provide week default efi_mem_attributes(). > In the mean time, IA64 continues to have its own implementation. While I'm not a huge fan of using __weak this makes the most sense to me because the alternative is to rename either the ia64 or x86 implementation and that just seems silly. > C. Add EFI_MEMMAP support (and related bits) in IA64. C. isn't an option because the ia64 memory map doesn't work the same way as x86 and arm64. > Which option do you prefer? Once there is a consensus, I am > willing to submit patch accordingly for review. Let's go with B. but please provide a comment above the weak implementation explaining *why* it's declared as weak and that any new architecture probably doesn't want to override it. Explain that the ia64 EFI memory map is special. -- Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
