On 04/18/2013 09:33 AM, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:00:26PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: >>> No, no - we *don't* have a BGRT object at all. >>> >>> We have a completely clean memory map - but the BGRT code is causing the >>> is_ram() failure. >> >> You assume that mapping of the Boot Services regions is done purely for >> the benefit of pulling out the bgrt image - it's not, see the above >> commit log - and I assumed that you had an ACPI bgrt pointer in your >> memory map, but you don't. >> >> Darren, Josh, have you ever seen an i386 machine with a bgrt pointer? If >> not, and given that we've never seen an i386 firmware that requires the >> above workaround from Matthew, combined with the fact that there are so >> few i386 implementations out there, I'm inclined to apply the patch >> below, because anything else is a lot more work. We can address this >> properly if we ever start seeing i386 machines with bgrt pointers that >> reference highmem. > > The machine I developed the BGRT changes on kept the image below the 4G > mark, inside one of the memory regions reclaimable via > ExitBootServices(). > Well, highmem is >= ~896M. Do you have a machine with BGRT over the highmem mark? -hpa -- 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
