On Thu, 2015-09-10 at 07:08 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 10.09.15 at 14:58, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-09-10 at 13:15 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > In any case this should be separate from the shim ABI discussion. > > > > > > I disagree; I think this is very much relevant to the ABI discussion. > > > That's not to say that I insist on a particular approach, but I think > > > that they need to be considered together. > > > > Taking a step back, the reason for using the EFI stub parameters is > > only > > (AFAIK) in order to be able to locate the ACPI RDSP (the root table > > pointer), which as it happens is normally passed via one of the EFI > > firmware tables. > > > > If there was a way to achieve that goal (i.e. another way to find the > > RSDP) > > without opening the can of UEFI worms then we could consider that > > opiton > > too. > > > > a way != the legacy x86 thing of scanning low memory of the signature, > > of > > course. > > But even x86 doesn't do that (other than as a fallback) on EFI. Indeed, I was referring legacy (non-EFI) mode. > The > configuration table is available to Dom0 (via XENPF_firmware_info: > XEN_FW_EFI_INFO:XEN_FW_EFI_CONFIG_TABLE). Under ARM we find out we are running under Xen from the ACPI tables, so there is a chicken and egg situation there. Not insoluble I'm sure, if we want to go down this route. Ian. -- 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
