Re: [PATCH v3] x86, efi: Calling __pa() with an ioremap'd addressis invalid

[Matt Fleming]

On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 13:12 +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 09:02 +0800, huang ying wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 03:34:48PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > >
> > >> After the feedback from v1 I tried to unify the efi_ioremap()
> > >> implementations but ran into the issue detailed in the RH bug report
> > >> in the changelog. Unless we teach the x86 setup code that
> > >> EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA regions should be part of the direct kernel
> > >> mapping table (even though they're marked as E820_RESERVED) I think
> > >> this patch makes the most sense.
> > >
> > > Honestly it seems like there may well be an argument for that. We're
> > > talking about executable code that the kernel will be calling - it seems
> > > theoretically neater for it to be added to the direct mapping. We're
> > > just heavily constrained by our collapsing of the EFI memory map onto
> > > the rather less fine-grained E820 one and the lack of any obvious way to
> > > extend that in an OS-specific manner. I guess we could expect the
> > > bootloader to conform to the standard and then re-walk the EFI memory
> > > map ourselves to fix things up, but eww...
> > 
> > Sorry for late.
> > 
> > Why ioremap_cache() can not work for some EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA region?
> 
> It looks like ioremap_cache() maps the region with the NX bit set.

Sorry, ignore this nonsensical answer, obviously we shouldn't be
executing data.

Honestly, I'm not sure why it doesn't work.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center

--
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/