On 27 January 2017 at 22:13, Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jan, at 05:04:50PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 27 January 2017 at 14:48, Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Fri, 13 Jan, at 05:29:52AM, Dave Young wrote: >> >> >> >> It sounds reasonable though I'm still not sure about EFI_LOADER*. >> >> >> >> The main purpose of this patch is to address the invalid mem ranges >> >> case. As Ard mentioned I will test with Peter's patch first, if it works >> >> fine I would like to either drop this patch as a future improvement or add >> >> it at the end of the next post. >> >> >> >> Matt, what's your opinion about the boot_only check and the EFI_LOADERS* >> >> question? >> > >> > The main reason that efi_mem_reserve() isn't used for EFI_LOADER >> > regions today is because we already have a mechanism for reserving it >> > via memblock_reserve(), which we do during a very early stage of boot >> > when parsing all the different types of SETUP_* objects. >> > >> > It's questionable whether it would make sense to switch to >> > efi_mem_reserve() for EFI_LOADER regions because then you'd >> > potentially have different APIs for different SETUP_* objects. >> > >> > As things stand today, I would suggest triggering a WARN_ON() if >> > someone tries to efi_mem_reserve() an EFI_LOADER region, until/unless >> > the day comes when a user exists in the kernel. >> >> Hmm, I just queued this. Should we drop it again? > > Does dropping it break the entire series? > > Having had some time to re-read Dave's commit log, it sounds like it > just papers over a bug, which is that efi_memmap_insert() cannot deal > with reserved entries, which all look like they describe the same > region. > No, it cannot deal with bogus entries, and Peter already fixed that. Dave confirmed that Peter's patch (the one we moved from next to urgen) made the problem go away. > So I guess my question is: Shouldn't you fix that instead of requiring > the caller of efi_memmap_insert() to understand what type of entries > it's mapping? Indeed. So I don't think the patch is actually needed anymore -- 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
