Re: [RFC PATCH] efi/x86: limit EFI old memory map to SGI UV1 machines

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Mistakenly dropped cc list, add again.
On 01/01/20 at 11:04am, Dave Young wrote:
> Hi Ard,
> On 12/31/19 at 12:13pm, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > (adding Boris and Dave for the historical perspective)
> > 
> > On Thu, 26 Dec 2019 at 10:55, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > We carry a quirk in the x86 EFI code to switch back to an older
> > > method of mapping the EFI runtime services memory regions, because
> > > it was deemed risky at the time to implement a new method without
> > > providing a fallback to the old method in case problems arose.
> > >
> > > Such problems did arise, but they appear to be limited to SGI UV1
> > > machines, and so these are the only ones for which the fallback gets
> > > enabled automatically (via a DMI quirk). The fallback can be enabled
> > > manually as well, by passing efi=old_map, but there is very little
> > > evidence that suggests that this is something that is being relied
> > > upon in the field.
> > >
> > > Given that UV1 support is not enabled by default by the distros
> > > (Ubuntu, Fedora), there is no point in carrying this fallback code
> > > all the time if there are no other users. So let's refactor it a bit
> > > to make it depend on CONFIG_X86_UV, and remove the ability to enable
> > > it by hand.
> > >
> > > Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Mike Travis <mike.travis@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Hedi Berriche <hedi.berriche@xxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Boris, since you were the one that added efi=old_map: do you know of
> > any cases beyond SGI UV1 where it was actually needed? There is some
> > mention of using it to work around transient breakage on 32-bit caused
> > by your original changes, but other than that, Google doesn't seem to
> > know about any cases where efi=old_map is being used to deal with
> > actual firmware quirks.
> > 
> > As a followup to this change, I'd like to move the old memmap handling
> > into the UV1 support code, so it is omitted unless UV support is
> > compiled it, and so it can be retired with the rest of it once that
> > time comes.
> > 
> 
> I also only know about the SGI UV1 quirk, and I'm not sure about
> if this affects some 32bit user, otherwise it should be a good idea
> As for the 32bit I remember Sai previously did use old_map for kexecing.
> Added Sai in cc for thoughts.
> 
> Thanks
> Dave




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux