From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: "Matt Fleming" <matt.fleming@intel.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Matthew Garrett" <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
<linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<cJ-ko@zougloub.eu>, "H. PeterAnvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [Regression] "x86-64/efi: Use EFI to deal with platform wall clock" prevents my machine from booting
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 11:50:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50210F0702000078000932EB@nat28.tlf.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1344331830.7208.6.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
>>> On 07.08.12 at 11:30, Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 08:14 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> That's not surprising. The question really is what goes wrong
>> when the call is being made - page fault, some other fault, or
>> silent hang. A page fault would point to an incorrect memory
>> map as the prime candidate for causing the problem. My
>> primary suspect would be #NM, i.e. the implementation using
>> floating point (SSE to be precise) instructions when they're
>> unavailable.
>
> I managed to find a machine to reproduce this on and it looks like the
> ASUS firmware engineers are upto their old tricks of referencing
> physical addresses after we've taken control of the memory map,
Yippie. On such systems we simply can't do any runtime calls.
Should we add a command line option forcing efi_native to false,
thus suppressing all runtime calls? Or would the "noefi" one be
enough already?
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-07 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-05 21:29 Jérôme Carretero
2012-08-05 22:28 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-06 6:44 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-06 12:52 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-08-06 13:08 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-06 13:16 ` Jérôme Carretero
2012-08-06 13:25 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-06 23:29 ` Jérôme Carretero
2012-08-07 7:05 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-07 2:32 ` Jérôme Carretero
2012-08-07 3:06 ` Jérôme Carretero
2012-08-07 7:14 ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-07 9:30 ` Matt Fleming
2012-08-07 10:50 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2012-08-09 8:51 ` Matt Fleming
2012-08-10 19:22 ` Yinghai Lu
2012-08-10 19:26 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-08-21 14:16 ` Matt Fleming
2012-08-10 3:49 ` Jérôme Carretero
2012-08-14 19:43 ` [tip:x86/urgent] Revert "x86-64/efi: Use EFI to deal with platform wall clock" tip-bot for H. Peter Anvin
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=50210F0702000078000932EB@nat28.tlf.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=cJ-ko@zougloub.eu \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
/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®