mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Randy Wright <rwright@filesys1.fc.hp.com>
To: mjg@redhat.com (Matthew Garrett)
Cc: rwright@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tmac@hp.com,
	hpa@zytor.com, mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] function probe_roms accessing improper addresses
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:05:01 -0600 (MDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201210231605.q9NG51KW022791@filesys1.fc.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121019153015.GD28212@srcf.ucam.org> from "Matthew Garrett" at Oct 19, 2012 04:30:15 pm

Hi Matthew,
 
You made some interesting suggestions:

> 1) Declare that any x86 hardware supported by Linux *must* support 
> probing in this address region

On the first: one way to be compliant with such a requirement would be 
to design systems that implement softfail in this particular region.   
What about a system that hardfails, but on which the resulting machine
check can be handled by the kernel machine check handler?  Would
appropriate re-ordering of the kernel initialization code to support
such systems be acceptable?

Also, let me mention a possible amendment to your first idea: what if
the mandate that probing be supported were qualified by some attribute
that could be indicated in the UEFI environment?  For example: instead
of just a hole in the UEFI memory map, what if this range was
specifically present and typed as EfiUnusableMemory?  Another idea for
UEFI systems - but one requiring a UEFI specification change - might be
adding a UEFI variable that if present, indicates any area not
explicitly included and typed in the UEFI memory map (including the
legacy adapter region) must be explicitly avoided by an OS.

> 2) Don't call probe_roms() by default, but leave it up to the graphics 
> drivers. If they can get the rom by any other means then don't call it.

One the second idea: there are a quite a lot of video drivers in the kernel
source tree.  Do you have a suggestion for how to evaluate which ones 
rely on the setup performed by probe_roms?

-- 
Randy Wright            Hewlett-Packard Company
Phone: (970) 898-0998   Mail: rwright@hp.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-10-23 16:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <jQZho-4fF-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <jSWfn-7B6-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
2012-10-19 15:20   ` Randy Wright
2012-10-19 15:30     ` Matthew Garrett
2012-10-19 15:37       ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-23 16:05       ` Randy Wright [this message]
2012-10-23 16:27         ` Matthew Garrett
2012-10-04 19:22 [PATCH RFC] function probe_roms accessing improper addresses on UEFI systems Matthew Garrett
2012-10-10  4:31 ` [PATCH RFC] function probe_roms accessing improper addresses Randy Wright

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=201210231605.q9NG51KW022791@filesys1.fc.hp.com \
    --to=rwright@filesys1.fc.hp.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
    --cc=mjg@redhat.com \
    --cc=rwright@hp.com \
    --cc=tmac@hp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®