Re: [Patch 1/1] x86 efi: Fill all reserved memmap entries if add_efi_memmapspecified.

[Mike Travis]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 05/25/2010 03:34 PM, Mike Travis wrote:
> > H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > On 05/13/2010 02:55 PM, Mike Travis wrote:
> > > > I saw that too, and wondered why e820_saved did not
> > > > have the extra entries.   The comment indicates it
> > > > should.
> > > >
> > > > I'm on the system tonight and will investigate this
> > > > further.
> > > e820_saved lacks the extra entries because they aren't being passed in
> > > from the bootloader, as they should, and instead you're using
> > > add_efi_memmap which is, as far as the kernel is concerned, a post-boot
> > > modification.
> > >
> > > That being said, add_efi_memmap does come from the firmware, and as such
> > > it would be legitimate for it to add them to e820_saved.
> > >
> > > 	-hpa
> > Did this last patch meet expectations?
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127474230623061&w=4
>
> I'm concerned about calling sanitize_e820_map() on e820_saved; it is
> supposed to reflect the raw data as reported by the source, and
> sanitizing it would corrupt that.
>
> 	-hpa

I wondered about that. Sanitize seems to remove adjacent
entries, etc. making the map smaller, but I couldn't detect
any real differences (though admittedly I didn't do a byte
by byte comparison.)

But I'll submit another with that call removed.

Thanks,
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/