On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:06 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I would strongly disagree that option 2 is the cleaner solution. Agreed. > > Linn Crosetto <linn@xxxxxx> wrote: >>I realize the EFI stub for ARM patches are in flight, >> >>https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/9/554 >> >>and overlap with some of the files but I wanted to send these out for >>comment. >> >>This series fixes a problem with EFI memory maps larger than 128 >>entries when >>booting using the EFI boot stub, which results in overflowing the >>e820_map in >>boot_params and an eventual halt when checking the map size in >>sanitize_e820_map(). >> >>The fix implemented is to add the EFI memory map from setup_arch() via >>a >>memory_setup hook. >> >>Two options were considered: >> >> 1. Use the SETUP_E820_EXT setup_data type to add the extra entries. >> >>2. Create a memory_setup function to be enabled when the EFI memory map >>is >> needed. >> >>Option 2 appeared to be the cleaner solution, reducing duplication with >>existing code, given a reasonable mechanism for determining when to >>replace the default memory_setup function. If boot_loader could create setup_data with SETUP_E820_EXT, efi_stub should go that path too. We should not add another path. Thanks Yinghai -- 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
