On 03/18/2013 03:04 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 15:02 +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On 03/18/2013 02:23 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> Yes, it's a phenomenally complicated operation from looking at the
>>> TianoCore source ... might we not be better off not bothering to
>>> relocate and just using a private physical mapping for the calls?
>>
>> Yeah, there have been various discussions about doing this. I sent some
>> patches last year but they broke various non-EFI machines and I haven't
>> had chance to pick it up again.
>
> Got a pointer? I may take a look...
>
See,
commit 53b87cf0 ("x86, mm: Include the entire kernel memory map in trampoline_pgd"),
commit 185034e7 ("x86, efi: 1:1 pagetable mapping for virtual EFI calls"),
commit da5a108d05b4 ("x86/kernel: remove tboot 1:1 page table creation code") and
commit bd52276fa1d4 ("x86-64/efi: Use EFI to deal with platform wall clock (again)")
and the two revert commits from Linus, be354f40 and 11520e5e.
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
