From: daniel.kiper@oracle•com (Daniel Kiper)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] efi/libstub/fdt: Standardize the names of EFI stub parameters
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 17:45:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150911154534.GD4530@olila.local.net-space.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu9rN7_mxk0huX+34HSCC_aTWVTkUZKQMB1+9U56fRnwsA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 03:30:15PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 11 September 2015 at 15:14, Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini@eu•citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Sep 2015, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 05:23:02PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> > > > C) When you could go:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > DT -> Discover Xen -> Xen-specific stuff -> Xen-specific EFI/ACPI discovery
> >> > >
> >> > > I take you mean discovering Xen with the usual Xen hypervisor node on
> >> > > device tree. I think that C) is a good option actually. I like it. Not
> >> > > sure why we didn't think about this earlier. Is there anything EFI or
> >> > > ACPI which is needed before Xen support is discovered by
> >> > > arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c:setup_arch -> xen_early_init()?
> >> >
> >> > Currently lots (including the memory map). With the stuff to support
> >> > SPCR, the ACPI discovery would be moved before xen_early_init().
> >> >
> >> > > If not, we could just go for this. A lot of complexity would go away.
> >> >
> >> > I suspect this would still be fairly complex, but would at least prevent
> >> > the Xen-specific EFI handling from adversely affecting the native case.
> >> >
> >> > > > D) If you want to be generic:
> >> > > > EFI -> EFI application -> EFI tables -> ACPI tables -> Xen-specific stuff
> >> > > > \------------------------------------------/
> >> > > > (virtualize these, provide shims to Dom0, but handle
> >> > > > everything in Xen itself)
> >> > >
> >> > > I think that this is good in theory but could turn out to be a lot of
> >> > > work in practice. We could probably virtualize the RuntimeServices but
> >> > > the BootServices are troublesome.
> >> >
> >> > What's troublesome with the boot services?
> >> >
> >> > What can't be simulated?
> >>
> >> How do you want to access bare metal EFI boot services from dom0 if they
> >> were shutdown long time ago before loading dom0 image? What do you need
> >> from EFI boot services in dom0?
> >
> > That's right. Trying to emulate BootServices after the real
> > ExitBootServices has already been called seems like a very bad plan.
> >
> > I think that whatever interface we come up with, would need to be past
> > ExitBootServices.
>
> It feels like this discussion is going in circles.
>
> When we discussed this six months ago, we already concluded that,
> since UEFI is the only specified way that the presence of ACPI is
> advertised on an ARM system, we need to emulate UEFI to some extent.
>
> So we need the EFI system table to expose the UEFI configuration table
> that carries the ACPI root pointer.
>
> Since ACPI support also relies on the UEFI memory map (I think?), we
> need that as well.
>
> These two items are exactly what we pass via the UEFI DT properties,
> so we should indeed promote the current de-facto binding to a proper
> binding, and renaming the properties makes sense in that context.
>
> I agree that this should also include a description of the expected
> state of the firmware, i.e., that ExitBootServices() has been called,
> and that the memory map has been populated with virtual address, which
> have been installed using SetVirtualAddressMap() if they differ from
> the physical addresses. (The current implementation on the kernel side
> is perfectly capable of dealing with a 1:1 mapping).
>
> Beyond that, there is no point in pretending to be a full UEFI
> implementation, imo. Boot services are not required, nor are runtime
> services (only the current EFI init code on arm needs to be modified
> to deal with a NULL runtime services pointer)
Taking into account above I think that you have most of the code in place.
Please take a look at linux/arch/x86/xen/efi.c, linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
and linux/drivers/xen/efi.c (maybe somewhere else). In general you should
create ARM version of xen_efi_init() (x86 version you can find in
linux/drivers/xen/efi.c; it is very simple thing), maybe add some
code in a few places and voila.
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-11 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-10 8:41 [PATCH] efi/libstub/fdt: Standardize the names of EFI stub parameters Shannon Zhao
2015-09-10 9:52 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-10 10:19 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-10 11:24 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-10 11:37 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-10 12:15 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-10 12:58 ` [Xen-devel] " Ian Campbell
2015-09-10 13:08 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-10 13:30 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-10 13:52 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-10 14:13 ` Leif Lindholm
2015-09-10 14:49 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-10 16:10 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-10 16:23 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-11 12:46 ` Daniel Kiper
2015-09-11 13:14 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-11 13:30 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-11 15:45 ` Daniel Kiper [this message]
2015-09-14 8:42 ` Shannon Zhao
2015-09-14 9:09 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-14 9:31 ` Shannon Zhao
2015-09-14 9:36 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-14 10:39 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2015-09-14 11:16 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-14 11:34 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-11 16:33 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-11 16:25 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-12 11:36 ` Daniel Kiper
2015-09-14 9:25 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-14 9:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-14 9:57 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-14 10:02 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-14 10:25 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-14 12:28 ` Daniel Kiper
2015-09-14 13:09 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-14 13:57 ` Daniel Kiper
2015-09-14 9:47 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-14 12:19 ` Daniel Kiper
2015-09-11 11:00 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-10 12:55 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-10 14:53 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-10 15:06 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-11 16:36 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-10 11:32 ` Andrew Turner
2015-09-10 11:48 ` Julien Grall
2015-09-10 12:05 ` Roger Pau Monné
2015-09-10 12:53 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall
2015-09-17 11:43 ` Shannon Zhao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150911154534.GD4530@olila.local.net-space.pl \
--to=daniel.kiper@oracle$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox